EVE General Discussion

I do not have to do that to prove you wrong you can see for yours self ever time you log in. That active doesn't lie.
See unlike you I research before I say ****. You just spew crap every time you hit reply.

When you grow up one day and move out of your mothers basement you will understand that at the end of the day a business needs to make money.
CCP does not give a **** about you or me they care about those numbers. And if numbers start to decline you can bet your ass they will step in to do something about it.

going uber nerdrage mode because someone made some statements other than praise about your game is not going to help this game get better. I understand that when I say something negative about EVE you take it rather personal as you live EVE and EVE if your life so as a byproduct of my insulting EVE I am directly insulting you.

I am sorry you feel that way but this is a topic about if CCP will step in to control inflation or not and we are not here to discuss your feelings.

The things I stated are my views on things that may or may not happen and cause CCP to take action.

I made the same suggestion a few years back. Put a 60 or 90 day age limit on PLEX. One of the problems was that each PLEX would then have to be a unique item with an expiration date. Of course, there are workarounds...All PLEX expire on the last day of the third full month following purchase--at least then they're batched together. Would lead to some interesting sales and runs on the PLEX market.

But, in general I think it's just a solution in search of a problem. PLEX have been the knife in the heart of EvE every time the price bumps up a little bit...and yet here we are.

On a separate note...re: the purpose of PLEX....thought it was two-fold--

1) allowing some players to "play for free" and
2) offering a sanctioned RMT method.

KB

If it's not worth your money then it's probably not worth your time either, as evidenced by your incessant complaining over PLEX prices.

Plex prices rising is inflation.
As in, guess what the price of damn near everything on the market is based on.

For example: Why does a domi at jita cost +180m?
Well, the price of minerals to produce said domi cost somewhere in that range.
Now, the miners {as a whole} whom sell the minerals to manufacturers pretty much set the prices on their goods.
Those miners are controlled by players, whom intrinsically value their time/effort/ability to play Eve for no RL cash *important part*


Lets say CCP decided to permanently cut the real life cash cost of plex by 50%. Ships, modules, & damn near everything else player produced would fall in price. Why? Plex prices decrease due to increased supply, cheaper plex = cheaper for the miners/moon goo overlords to play for free.

No. PLEX prices rising is PLEX prices rising, nothing more. It is not the general increase in prices for goods of services (preferably as a result of increased money supply) that qualifies as inflation. PLEX prices in particular are not inflation since their price increase is almost entirely speculation.

And the price of damn near everything in Jita is based on minerals and moon goo adjusted for how much of their disposable income people are willing top art with. This has almost nothing to do with PLEX but with speed of money and materials acquisition. Hence why stuff has only gotten cheaper as the efficiency of materials acquisition has gone up (and ISK and destruction efficiency hasn't been able to keep pace).

If PLEX prices were reduced by 50%, the price of the goods would remain almost exactly the same. Why? Because the time it takes to acquire the materials and the ISK is unaffected, as is the rate of loss. Yes, in-game PLEX prices would see a sharp downwards pressure, but that's it — there's no reason or incentive for anyone to cut their prices. In fact, if anything, a lower (ISK) price for PLEX would mean more time over for blowing stuff up, which would raise the prices of everything else.

The notion that item prices are somehow connected to PLEX prices is trivially dismissed by the fact that item prices have gone up and down (mainly down) whereas PLEX prices have only ever really gone up, and that the only significant things that have made items more expensive are direct alterations of materials availability and alterations in material requirements for specific items.

That's were you lost me. Inflation is good, because it shows that there is growth in the economy? Do you know what real worlds biggest economy problem is? It's based on continually growth.

Well - at the end this thread ended with too much blabla and self-profiling. But I guess one of the answers was that CCP manipulates prices and occurrence or pies/belts ressource and so on.

However, I got my answers - somehow. But this thread is a good example how deprecated this forum is compared to stack exchange alike Q&A forum.

Thanks to everyone that participated.

You came into this thread without a clear understanding of what inflation is (and is not), what an isk faucet is (and is not), what an isk sink is (and is not), or how PLEX work in a market environment. I hope you are leaving a little more educated :)

Jirk's expression;

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DullSurprise

Actually, the broken window fallacy is still valid for Eve, it is perhaps better to consider the broken window constrained. Breaking windows surely helps the Eve economy have incentive to replace those broken windows, but it is not what makes the Eve economy grow.

We must first recognize that for an individual, corp or alliance, destroyed wealth is destroyed. That lost wealth must be replaced, instead of used to some other purpose, which is Bastiat's point.

The constraint upon the fallacy is, there are few places for excess wealth to go and frankly there is not much anyone can do with it except make or brake more windows.

Understood. That 'pointless' bit is important. Eve is a game, and people want to have fun. 'Fun' being very subjective.




We all always want more stuff and better stuff. Unlimited demand exists in Eve just as it exists in the real world. Even if things were to never blow up, players would still demand more and better stuff. We have ample evidence of this with the so called risk averse carebear sect flying around in 20 billion isk pimped out faction ships. (Outside of Eve, there are countless games that allow people to build, create and demand more stuff at pretty much zero risk, from SimCity to those inane PopCap games. ... hence the subjectivity of 'fun'.)

Suppose however we could make 'fun' not subjective, by classifying all destruction of in-game wealth in pursuit of a 'point' (your 'pointless' reference) measurable. Then perhaps we can say: It is the destruction of the wealth and building of the replacement wealth where the 'fun' is, the absolute value of the 'fun' in ISK terms. "Objectified Fun", if you will.

Perhaps then we can more enlightenedly say, the broken window fallacy is not a fallacy in Eve. So, although constrained, it is perhaps also inverted, as it relates to Eve.

Just as a side note, it is this measure of 'fun' that justifies the actions of the "minerals I mine are free" crowd. They had fun mining their rocks, the opportunity cost involved in under pricing their manufactured goods, could be said to be the objective measure of the fun they had in mining the rocks.

anyway, lunch time, rambling over.