EVE General Discussion

Incorrect, as you even manage to point out yourself.

It is the third largest sink in the game (maybe even competing for the spot of being the largest if you combine the different parts, but it's hard to tell from just the diagram and no accurate numbers).

Again, Transaction taxes are a separate category and cannot be "Tied" to bounties just because you want to be right.

You are wrong on this, and the sad thing is I am pretty sure you realized it a while ago and can't admit it.

…together with broker fees the unavoidable sinks that happen to all the ISK that is not sunk any other way.

I'm sorry if you don't understand how the market and the economy works. With that name, you really need to read up on these things. You also need to learn not to put words in my mouth, because that will only end badly for you.

Doesn't matter. It's still a sink, and the various market fees rival the other big two ones (skills and LP), so it's not something you can just ignore for the sake of convenience. When they changed the base market tax rate, it had a pretty decent impact on the amount of ISK sunk in the game.

Sure. That's because a 1:1 ratio would actively be bad for the economy — you want the faucets to be larger than the sinks. In EVE as a whole, we roughly have a 2:1 ratio between faucets and sinks, which has worked reasonably well to create a healthy economy.

There are most definitely market bots. Sometimes I'll need to buy several of a certain item, and the cheapest one on the market will have a quantity of 1. So I'll buy that one first. The market window lags for a second as the market updates and removes the one I bought... and wouldn't you know! There is a new sell order of 1 for the exact price I just paid for the first item. So I buy that one... Then a new sell order of 1 at the same price takes it's place. Over and over. I look at my market journal, I just bought 6 items at the same price from the same character... one at a time.

I don't see how it is possible for someone to know exactly when one of their items sold, and place a new sell order at the appropriate price, all within the second or so time frame that it takes for the market to update for me when I buy something. Obviously a bot, and an actual person trying to have the lowest sell order on this item would not be able to do so.

Whenever I notice this happening I report the player as a bot. Dunno if CCP actually does anything about it or not.

You literally do get ISK. Not from LP store transactions, but from activities that reward LP. I believe that's what Frostys is talking about.
He is establishing a possibility that, by completing a mission or incursion site, the liquid ISK given to you by the game is there for you to purchase items from the store at a discounted price, partial of which is covered by LP. Hence you get isk+LP, sink isk+LP, and end up transferring ISK through transactions on the player market by trading commodities like modules and consumables.

That's an ideal scenario, but I personally saw no evidence supporting that the ISK injected by those activities is the exact right amount that all of it is burned to bring commodities into the economy through the LP store. Having ran L4 FWW missions, I typically get roughly 2-3mill ISK +10~20k LP. This doesn't demonstrate anything yet. The rewarded ISK/LP ratio is ~200-300. But it needs to pitted against the ISK+LP cost of items at the store. Datacores, at 250000 ISK 250LP per 5 ends up being 1000 ISK/LP. More ISK is gone per LP, I think? Cannot brain ATM.

And that is accounted for in Mission Rewards.

LP itself is however 100% worthless until it is turned into CCP, at which point you are sinking ISK by giving it to CCP. You take said product and sell it and it is a lateral transfer between players.

AT NO POINT EVER IN THIS GAME CAN LP BE TURNED INTO CCP FOR RAW ISK. PERIOD

Number of active players is obviously declining. I am interested to know which segments of players: professional, entrepreneur, aggressor, social or traditional, is decreasing most.

I really hope the new structures can be rolled out as soon as possible. They have features that appeal to all segments of players, whether they are old or new to EVE. Expanding player base will benefit to all existing players.

Doesn't matter. You're still not creating that ISK without deleting some, and at the end of the day, you will not create any ISK without deleting some. The best you can do in terms of avoiding that deletion is to just have it as a soft-sink, where it is no longer in the economy due to inactivity.

Market taxes and fees are, unavoidably, the catch-all fall-through sink for all ISK that doesn't get swallowed up anywhere else.


Either way, you're getting hooked up on a detail you don't misunderstand and misconstrue and keep missing the bigger point I was actually making: that there's a reason why faucets and sinks are always reported separately per faucet/sink type rather than slapped together as a net activity outcome. It's because, if you want to know where ISK is coming from and where it's going, that's the only way to actually provide a useful answer without accidentally filtering out stuff that are hugely important for the economy or creating utterly useless combo-groups that tell us nothing (eg. if we want to look at what LP balances out, we have to combine at least three different activities, but the whole point was to distinguish them so that attempt defeats itself).

The argument here seems to be that Incursions are somehow neutral because the rewards in LP and ISK follow the same general pattern as you often see in the LP stores (exactly what this is an argument against is a different matter…) and the two cancel each other out. There are two problems with that: one is that it is just that — a general pattern — not a universal truth, and even if it were, it would rely on a completely consistent player behaviour. Neither of those are the case, and we don't have a division per activity so we can't actually say anything about how well that best-case scenario neutrality really plays out. The other problem is that we're not just discussing ISK injection, we're also talking income, at which point that ISK sinking actually represents a multiplication of wealth — we have a funny situation where 100 ISK - 100 ISK = 300 ISK.

Yeah. The FW rates are not close to even (even if mission weere, LP from kills and plex spinning would still have none. The one that are about as close to even are incursion. You get the right amount of ISK to use the LP you got for completing a site. 1k ISK for every LP you get. The real question is why did CCP even bother giving us ISK.

And PVE opportunities. The problem with your assertion is that it suggest that people who care about this specific imbalance care because of PVP. The real problem with the imbalance is how it skews tings in the game.

Lots of incursion runners (myself included) aren't high sec people, we use this broken thing to safely fund other activities (and to PLEX).

This shouldn't be the case. When I started playing, if you wanted to make big isk with a shikp shooting npcs, you took big risk. Now you train up a ship, x up in a high sec incursion community chat channel (or on their web app), and follow the orders of an FC while mindlessly shooting npcs, without even have to personally glance at local or d-scan or be aware at all.

That's just not good game design, my choice should be 'modest but reasonable income should I choose to stay in safe space (which is my choice to make) or MUCH better income if i accept risk. Right now it's 'take risk/make less-no risk/make more'.

And i've tested it personally, 2 ways.

I make more with my incursion mach in high sec than I do with a mach and a tengu doing anomalies in null

And

I make more with my incursion mach than I do with the cheaper to lose ships I've used in the past (when I lived in low sec) to run low sec incursions, mainly because low sec incursions come with people trying to kill you. No CONCORD to save the day there so no bling ships taken.

It's all utter nonsense imo. Do I expect it to change? No, CCP is a great company, but PVE isn't their forte.