These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Market Discussions

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

EVE's Economy - "Not Player Driven"

First post
Author
Adunh Slavy
#61 - 2013-09-03 14:26:52 UTC
Felicity Love wrote:
... loves all the pseudo-intellectual windbaggery concerning "real world" this and "ingame" that, and thinks CCP should get Warren Buffet to be a Market "guest Dev" for awhile.Blink




That's all Eve needs, another lying scum bag scammer

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt

Diska Eamod
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#62 - 2013-09-05 16:29:43 UTC
GreenSeed wrote:
following the OPs quotes one can easily argue that reality has no "human driven" economy.


Well said.
Hemmo Paskiainen
#63 - 2013-09-09 07:08:14 UTC
Ccp always used to be bob and goons and kept the o.o politics going. But than t20 came around and made a woopsy so bob had to go... now only goons are left

If relativity equals time plus momentum, what equals relativity, if the momentum is minus to the time?

Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
#64 - 2013-09-13 11:06:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Brewlar Kuvakei
Hemmo Paskiainen wrote:
Ccp always used to be bob and goons and kept the o.o politics going. But than t20 came around and made a woopsy so bob had to go... now only goons are left


Well they got to keep all their T2BPO's so they only really left in name only, they also get great heads up news on upcoming changes. Eve's not dead but it's been dying since Kugu revealed what a crap fest it is.
Steirmann
Interstellar Machines
#65 - 2013-09-15 06:52:08 UTC
The economy will never be totally player controlled because a player controlled currency will never work.

A player currency will never work because players can't be trusted.

Players can't be trusted because players can default on loans, or other future contractual commitments, with impunity.

Players can't be forced to honor contracts, because they can always quit the game. Non-one can be forced to play a game.



Enforceable contracts are a cornerstone of a free-market economy.
Tuggboat
Oneida Inc.
#66 - 2013-09-15 07:23:46 UTC
Sounds like some right wing whacko religious kook anarchist tea party libertarian trying to apply his mental masturbations to a video game
Adunh Slavy
#67 - 2013-09-15 15:58:10 UTC
Tuggboat wrote:
Sounds like some right wing whacko religious kook anarchist tea party libertarian trying to apply his mental masturbations to a video game


Is this what passes for objective commentary in the left/right sheep pens these days?

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt

Tuggboat
Oneida Inc.
#68 - 2013-09-15 19:37:23 UTC
define objective? Is it not a bit nebulous also like our op's "friends" anarchist/barter driven economic werldview?
Adunh Slavy
#69 - 2013-09-15 19:55:55 UTC
Tuggboat wrote:
define objective? Is it not a bit nebulous also like our op's "friends" anarchist/barter driven economic werldview?


Your defense for your rant is attempting to redefine objective.

This passes for intelligence in your circles no doubt.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt

Tuggboat
Oneida Inc.
#70 - 2013-09-15 22:50:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Tuggboat
oh god, ive been accused of a rant. Have it your way, I'll trade you 800 bajillion rifters for a titan, all union made of course
Adunh Slavy
#71 - 2013-09-15 23:48:58 UTC
Tuggboat wrote:
oh god, ive been accused of a rant. Have it your way, I'll trade you 800 bajillion rifters for a titan, all union made of course



Accused? I have proof. Get back in the shallow end, it's safer.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt

Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
#72 - 2013-09-16 00:27:51 UTC
And .. while you're at it.. may as well complain about the artificial rules on real world economies aimed at achieveing social goals... wasteful and misguided sometimes, but none the less providing some social insurance and buffering to extreme swings of short run effects on segments of populations even if in a wasteful way in terms of "maximum" out-put. Sometimes distribution is as important as aggregate in terms of maintaing a civil society and a rule of law that allows the protection of private property in the first place.

Or.. football.. why does it put artificial constraints on competition like minutes in the game and those pesky out of bounds lines?

Sure.. the players have all out competition within the rules... but ... its not a true player driven match if the players are contrained by rules on the pitch?

Silly.. the economy is player driven within the scafold..... rules are there.. players drive the economy competitively under the context.. just like gravity in the real word was set by whoever created physics and the particle level forces that ultimately lead to soemthing that can be measured to 14 meters per second per second (or whatever it is)

.

Tuggboat
Oneida Inc.
#73 - 2013-09-16 00:33:43 UTC
If you want what the OP is trying to post scribe everything is negotiable including word and number definitions and even if CCP removed ISK from game you could still claim that they had had their hand in it and it was still not player driven. I could trade a bajillion rifters and define what a rifter is as well as what a bajillion is. In a universe without trust, how far would that go? What makes trust? sticking to agreements and you have to have agreements before you can build trust.

All economies rapidly evolve to more convenient forms of wealth through tradeable symbols that have agreed upon values. If they are not agreed upon by at least three parties they have no worth other than to each other. Once you have more than two parties and people start agreeing and forming a social consensus that consensus becomes an authority also.

but kooky libertarians and their sorts reserve the right to not be part of the consensus, to not agree so that the rest of us can have nothing of value, no trust, no order, anarchy.
Adunh Slavy
#74 - 2013-09-16 03:42:47 UTC
Tuggboat wrote:

but kooky libertarians and their sorts reserve the right to not be part of the consensus, to not agree so that the rest of us can have nothing of value, no trust, no order, anarchy.


You do not know what libertarianism is, and you do not know what anarchy is, in the context they use it, more to the point, anarcho-capitalisim.

If you're going to argue against something, best to know what it is you're talking about. Words like "kooky" just make you look ignorant.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt

Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
#75 - 2013-09-16 05:42:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Diomedes Calypso
Adunh Slavy wrote:
Tuggboat wrote:

but kooky libertarians and their sorts reserve the right to not be part of the consensus, to not agree so that the rest of us can have nothing of value, no trust, no order, anarchy.


You do not know what libertarianism is, and you do not know what anarchy is, in the context they use it, more to the point, anarcho-capitalisim.

If you're going to argue against something, best to know what it is you're talking about. Words like "kooky" just make you look ignorant.




Take a look at his avatar and appreciate the humor in those words...


I'm not sure but I think " looking ignorant" might be an improvement.. not much a threat



... also.. he was taunting you I believe....by purposely muddling them all up in a pretty pile

.

Adunh Slavy
#76 - 2013-09-16 05:57:37 UTC
Diomedes Calypso wrote:

... also.. he was taunting you I believe....by purposely muddling them all up in a pretty pile



Taunting me, by outing him self as a state loving slave? Ok then.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt

Tuggboat
Oneida Inc.
#77 - 2013-09-16 08:22:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Tuggboat
The Ammatars are descendants of Minmatars that collaborated with the Amarrians during the latter occupation of the Minmatar worlds. When the Amarrians were thrown out during the Minmatar Rebellion their collaborators fled with them. The Amarrians helped their Minmatar allies to settle in a few systems not far from the newly formed Minmatar Republic. The Ammatars regard themselves as the true rulers of the Minmatars, mainly based around the fact that a fair proportion of the old Minmatar aristocracy, or tribal leaders, were among them. In this vein they named their domain San Matar, meaning ‘true home’.

The term Ammatar was first used by the Gallenteans to distinguish between the two groups. Out of convenience even the Ammatars themselves started using it, stating that, with the help of the Amarrians, they’ve progressed beyond the old social structure of the Minmatar tribes. Indeed, the Ammatars have very deliberately abolished many age-old traditions of the Minmatar tribal society and embraced some Amarrian ones instead.

The Ammatar domain, San Matar, is semi-autonomous. The Ammatar rulers have full domestic control, but their foreign policies must have the consent of the Amarrians and their military forces are, nominally, under the authority of the Amarrians. The relationship of the two has been remarkably smooth in the past, with no serious quarrels.

The San Matar government is structured the same way as any other province of the Amarr Empire, with a governor at the head and district officials beneath him prescribing over the various departments of state. These heads of state are always Ammatar, although the governor himself traditionally is an Amarrian, and acts as the supreme representative of the Amarr Empire. As is to be expected not all Ammatars are eager for constant warfare with the Minmatar Republic. Those who are the most belligerent of them often feel that the Ammatar state is doing too little so they have formed a group of their own to fight the Minmatars. In a sense this group is a direct response to the independent rebel groups the Minmatar have and the guerilla tactics employed by either side are similar.

Since its inauguration San Matar has been in a constant struggle with the Minmatar Republic. Both states have expanded considerably in the last decades and now border on each other in numerous places. The Republic, backed by the Gallente Federation, had the upper hand for a while, forcing the Amarr Empire to repeatedly come to the aid of their allies, but in recent years the tables have been turning and the Ammatar have managed to set up military installations and space stations right under the Republic’s nose

Broad speculation existed for many years on where the Ammatar got the support for these conquests, as the Amarr traditionally were only willing to aid the Ammatars when the latter were under direct threat. Though nothing has been conclusively proven, it is widely whispered that for decades the Caldari provided clandestine support to the Ammatar in exchange for the promise of mineral rights to the rich territories being battled over. These allegations were a frequent diplomatic sticking point between the Caldari and the Minmatar, and the mere mention of them rankles both sides to this day.


Tell me again who is the slave
Adunh Slavy
#78 - 2013-09-16 08:32:10 UTC
Tuggboat wrote:

Tell me again who is the slave



Is this the Role Play Forum? And if it is ... hey dude, I'm Caldari. Back to the drawing board with you.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt

Tuggboat
Oneida Inc.
#79 - 2013-09-16 08:35:02 UTC
So much for never conclusively proven.
Jdestars
Stars Research systems Incorporation
#80 - 2013-09-16 15:31:26 UTC
The economy managed by the players in a limit: the one that fixes the gameplay on which decides the publisher CCP

When CCP dicovers some breakings rules mechanical ( exploit game ) , they counter them

but also when player used the market rules CCP introduce some new rules for counter them too ? why ? because some player in CSM crying for th troubleshouting of their madness external fail macro ? ...

Unlike markets irl the capacity of the zone of storage in station(resort) NPC what are infinite what allows operations that markets reality could not envisage what Eve allows:
- absent in cool(expenses) of storage
- absence of limit of storage
- resource infinity
- entropy of the resource according to the increasing number player

so If CCP intervenes on the gameplays of games(sets) to counter mechanism normal of the markets, they have to change clearly position and finish with dogmatic positron that they **** cheerfully in profit of some players.

some key :

- introduce again the npc orders for calm down the fire of quotation ( based on baseprice npc fixe in db if available)
- Limit the volume of storage in station(resort) Npc (well to avoid the phenomena of hub and fluidify the exchanges)
- ressource respawn are always under control

-On the other hand, the mathematical and statistical laws it cannot be questioned. It was necessary to think of it before setting up the mechanisms of games (to whip the project director and the economic leader )