These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

ISK sink ideas
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#21 - 2015-11-25 18:44:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Serendipity Lost wrote:


Blow up more ships is the way to go. I just want to point out that there are many many many 'smart' economists in the real world and in the eve world. I'd also like to point out that most of the world is horribly in debt and eve is absolutely drowning in isk. I'm not saying that collectively you guys don't have a ton of cool things to say - I'm saying this kind of crap is putting the real world in the toilet.

I'll bottom line it for you. It's a epic space fantasy game. Ships need to blow up in fun and interesting ways or the game dies. You can talk about details all day long and if ships aren't blowing up in fun and interesting ways in the background then the details really don't matter. It's not an economic simulator - it's a space fantasy game. You don't remove isk by tweaking taxes and hanging npc leeches on a guys wallet. You make it fun, you make it interesting and you blow stuff up.

Please take your scholarly economics crap and shove it where the sun don't shine. I'll speak for myself. I don't want to be taxed to death in eve to keep the isk flow down. I want stuff to explode. As long as players are farting around w/ npc crap instead of doing bad things to each other, then everyone will keep making way way way more isk than the tax man (or any form of npc isk sink hoo haw) will be able to take away.

No one (well except maybe 30 or so economist nerds) wants to log into a space game to shoot little red geometry things, stack some isk and then have some npc transaction take it all away. That's not how you balance a game, and if there is one thing I'm sure of - this is a game.

(read this slowly) BLOW SSSSHHHHHIIIIITTTTTT UP.


So let me get this straight...I'm agreeing with you that there is probably too much ISK entering the game and your response is to attack me indirectly by pointing out that economists are supposedly the sole reason so many countries are in debt or have screwed up economies? By the way, nice job give a huge ****ing pass to the politicians who do stupid ****ing **** with their economies all the time. As I have said on occasion, "We do not have stupid policies on accident, we have them on purpose." Case in point, very rudimentary result of economics: You want less of something, tax it. So what do most countries tax: Income. The implication is politicians want people to have less income. Income taxes can also discourage saving...savings are where investment in capital goods are made--i.e. those goods that let you make even more stuff in the future. So politicians want even less future economic output as well. Economists know this, which is why they argue for taxes on things that are bad (e.g. pollution) or on things that we don't always want more of (e.g. consumption), or at least try to reduce the distortions that taxes impose on the economy. So spare us that kind of armchair political nonsense.

An no where have I suggested that there be less PvP or less blowing up of stuff. I was merely pointing out that it is not an ISK sink. And it isn't. And since you cannot argue that it is you have to attack me.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#22 - 2015-11-25 18:50:34 UTC
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Are you seriously trying to promote player run missions paid out in universal LP is the way to fix the eve economy? After what has been repeatedly done w/ LP in the past you want to introduce CONCORD LP that can be used anywhere?


You're not trying to get isk out of the game - you're working to funnel it into your own wallet.

CCP has taken some very fishy bait in the past, but come on - even the Fozzinator isn't going to go in on this one.


LP are an ISK sink. And since I don't run missions or even rat that much....not much ISK would flow into my wallet that way (I actually make my ISK in game by making 'real' items).

But thanks for attacking me vs. putting up a rational/cogent argument against my idea.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#23 - 2015-11-25 19:07:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Here is an idea Serendipity tell us why blowing up a ship is an ISK sink. Note that my example actually does have an ISK sink in it, but it isn't sufficient to stop the in-game money supply from growing (not that money supply growth is bad in and of itself, but if the growth is too fast it can be bad).

So, on the second trip around the circular economy the PvP/E guys get another 500 ISK and they go buy ships from the industry guys. The industry guys sink 400 ISK, leaving them with 100 ISK. The ships are sold and now the industry guys have 600 ISK and the PvP/E guys have 0. Ships are destroyed....and the process repeats, our third trip results in 700 ISK in the economy. Our fourth trip 800, etc. Each trip around the circle adds 100 (20% of the ratting income) more ISK to the economy.

Now if we added something like PLEX those industry guys might start buying those up, depending on the amount of PLEX being put on the in game market we could see the price being bid up over time as industry types keep getting 100 ISK each trip around the economy. If the PvP/E guys decide they want PLEX too, they might rat more and further increase demand.

Yes this is a simple model, but all models are simple, in every field. That is the whole point of a model, to simplify and make it possible to analyze things.

And while there are sinks from building ships and modules to replace those that are blown up, those sinks will never fully offset the ISK source. If they did then you'd have no more market. Nobody can sustain losses indefinitely.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#24 - 2015-11-25 19:11:11 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Are you seriously trying to promote player run missions paid out in universal LP is the way to fix the eve economy? After what has been repeatedly done w/ LP in the past you want to introduce CONCORD LP that can be used anywhere?


You're not trying to get isk out of the game - you're working to funnel it into your own wallet.

CCP has taken some very fishy bait in the past, but come on - even the Fozzinator isn't going to go in on this one.


LP are an ISK sink. And since I don't run missions or even rat that much....not much ISK would flow into my wallet that way (I actually make my ISK in game by making 'real' items).

But thanks for attacking me vs. putting up a rational/cogent argument against my idea.



The 'you made my feelings all ouchy' ploy. Sigh.

No amount of math, jargon or NPC syphoning of isk will overcome the isk coming into this game. Large space fights are the only way to do it. For that to happen pvp has to be fun, interesting and meaningful.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#25 - 2015-11-25 19:12:43 UTC
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Are you seriously trying to promote player run missions paid out in universal LP is the way to fix the eve economy? After what has been repeatedly done w/ LP in the past you want to introduce CONCORD LP that can be used anywhere?


You're not trying to get isk out of the game - you're working to funnel it into your own wallet.

CCP has taken some very fishy bait in the past, but come on - even the Fozzinator isn't going to go in on this one.


LP are an ISK sink. And since I don't run missions or even rat that much....not much ISK would flow into my wallet that way (I actually make my ISK in game by making 'real' items).

But thanks for attacking me vs. putting up a rational/cogent argument against my idea.



The 'you made my feelings all ouchy' ploy. Sigh.

No amount of math, jargon or NPC syphoning of isk will overcome the isk coming into this game. Large space fights are the only way to do it. For that to happen pvp has to be fun, interesting and meaningful.


Which is why limiting the source is probably a more efficacious approach.

And no, you didn't not hurt my feelings with our utter nonsense, I was just pointing out you don't actually have a valid argument, just vitriol.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#26 - 2015-11-25 19:59:07 UTC  |  Edited by: afkalt
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Buying a ship does not remove ISK from the game. Destroying a ship removes minerals, and a small amount of ISK if it was a faction ship.


No, manufacturing isn't free, also sales and contract taxes.

There are a number of sinks over an above the mineral loss.


Edit: Further - tinkering with the relative spending value or worth of isk only serves to double down on the rich/poor divide.

I know people with personal wealth of trillions - if isk became scarcer then their relative worth increases hilariously.
Kaybella Hakaari
State War Academy
Caldari State
#27 - 2015-11-25 20:30:07 UTC
The world is in debt because very few people can print money.

EVE is drowning in ISK because basically everyone can print money-and a lot of it, mosty through rat bounties and some mission rewards. Pretty much every other way to get ISK is through some kind of trade. This isn't a total wreck on EVE's economy because the human element is removed from a lot of aspects of EVE production, especially at the lower levels: paying more doesn't get you a better item from the production line or the LP store-and, no matter who builds it or where, an Ishtar is an Ishtar is an Ishtar.
Sean Parisi
Blackrise Vanguard
#28 - 2015-11-25 20:32:32 UTC
Remove tags from the loyalty point store or vastly reduce the amount of tags required. Add an arbitrary ISK cost to the items as a replacement to the tags (Not too high, but enough). Now people will use their LP to more effectively farm Faction Modules as opposed to just using LP to dump on ships and ammunition. Otherwise, make tags more accessible and increase the ISK cost component to levy it out.

Add more LP items and more corps that specialize in such items (Think FW LP stores and Pirate Faction Stores that have special items). Add more activities that can gain LP similar to Faction Warfare and Incursions and give them specific loot tables that are original to that.

Sometimes I hear people complain "Hurr durr Faction Warfare People Make So Much Isk It Isn't an ISK Sink". Now let me explain.

If someone rats they create ISK, every bounty is adding new ISK into the game.

Faction Warfare and LP stores take ISK out of the game, ISK is spent and sent directly to an NPC corporation where it dissolves. They are then given an item to trade that is worth a lot of ISK - this item is then traded and taxed by the empires further pushing isk out. At no point in this process is new ISK added into the game unless done so by regular missioning.

What needs to happen is to have more LP weight as opposed to ISK 'bounty' weight added. Which will cycle out extra ISK.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#29 - 2015-11-25 21:41:21 UTC
afkalt wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Buying a ship does not remove ISK from the game. Destroying a ship removes minerals, and a small amount of ISK if it was a faction ship.


No, manufacturing isn't free, also sales and contract taxes.

There are a number of sinks over an above the mineral loss.


Edit: Further - tinkering with the relative spending value or worth of isk only serves to double down on the rich/poor divide.

I know people with personal wealth of trillions - if isk became scarcer then their relative worth increases hilariously.


This is true, but the ISK sink will always be less than the ISK coming into the economy, if this were not the case for a given market that market would not exist. That is why looking at sources would likely lead to a better outcome.

And to be clear, removing or limiting the amount of ISK entering the game simply to remove or limit ISK entering the game economy is not the goal. The idea is to have a reasonable growth rate in the amount of ISK in the game.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#30 - 2015-11-25 22:00:52 UTC
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Serendipity Lost wrote:
See we're back to eve needs more explosions. Every player out blowing up other players doesn't have his gaping maw sucking on some isk faucet. PVP permanantly removes stuff from the game AND it occupies folks so they aren't running incursions or carrier ratting in some upgraded anom laden system.

You want to remove isk from the game - get rid of those pathetic system upgrades. The pandering that allowed them is a bane on the game. No need to fight over good space.... just deploy this upgrade to make all space worth not fighting for.

You shouldn't be able to 'rent' good space from CCP via system upgrades. You should have to go take the good spots and then have to hold them.


No, actually they do. Using my example above, note the PvP/E guys are now not only ISK poor, but also ship poor. Assuming they have their PvE ships still it will be back to the anomalies to repeat the process. Another spin around our little simple circular economy would add yet another 500 ISK to the economy.

And removing system upgrades is not a sink, but constraining or limiting a source. Not that this is bad, but it is looking at the other end of system. In fact, it is the approach I prefer. Instead of trying to find ways to find ways to drain ISK from people's wallets, find a way to keep the ISK from getting in there in the first place.

One approach would be to reconsider all of NS income flows. Instead of using the anomaly model shift over to missions. You'd still go kill your local rats but now you'd get some ISK, but also LP from CONCORD. You could then designate an LP store you'd purchase from, so I could purchase from Fed Navy while another could go with whatever the Minmatar version of the Fed Navy is (sorry, never ran many missions in HS). You could switch as well, but there'd be a lag in doing so. The LP store would need some re-working so that prices don't crash through the floor.

Now instead of just injecting ISK Into the economy via anomalies NS ratters would also be injecting "real" goods (I know the real/nominal distinction sounds weird in a virtual economy) into the economy via LP store items. Further, the lower ISK payouts would help insure that there is a positive growth rate to the money supply. We don't want the money supply to actually contract, IMO.


Blow up more ships is the way to go. I just want to point out that there are many many many 'smart' economists in the real world and in the eve world. I'd also like to point out that most of the world is horribly in debt and eve is absolutely drowning in isk. I'm not saying that collectively you guys don't have a ton of cool things to say - I'm saying this kind of crap is putting the real world in the toilet.

I'll bottom line it for you. It's a epic space fantasy game. Ships need to blow up in fun and interesting ways or the game dies. You can talk about details all day long and if ships aren't blowing up in fun and interesting ways in the background then the details really don't matter. It's not an economic simulator - it's a space fantasy game. You don't remove isk by tweaking taxes and hanging npc leeches on a guys wallet. You make it fun, you make it interesting and you blow stuff up.

Please take your scholarly economics crap and shove it where the sun don't shine. I'll speak for myself. I don't want to be taxed to death in eve to keep the isk flow down. I want stuff to explode. As long as players are farting around w/ npc crap instead of doing bad things to each other, then everyone will keep making way way way more isk than the tax man (or any form of npc isk sink hoo haw) will be able to take away.

No one (well except maybe 30 or so economist nerds) wants to log into a space game to shoot little red geometry things, stack some isk and then have some npc transaction take it all away. That's not how you balance a game, and if there is one thing I'm sure of - this is a game.

(read this slowly) BLOW SSSSHHHHHIIIIITTTTTT UP.


Blowing stuff up does not improve the economy, except for mineral markets. It can be made to be a sink by adjusting manufacturing away from harvested resources and instead require seeded materials purchased with ISK. This will harm mineral markets but improve the loss of ISK from the game.

Of course, creating consumables that improve combat for a short time would assist in blowing stuff up and create a sink. Consumables that acted as skill boosters (capping a skill at 6) would not only aid in blowing stuff up, but would provide a path to level the field between vets and new folks without fundamental changes to the SP system.

Cosmetics would have been ideal, but they used that particular guranteed cash cow on Aurum.
Zimmer Jones
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2015-11-26 00:01:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Zimmer Jones
Once upon a time I ran for mayor of a city. It was really just a way to get free drinks. You had to fill out the application form, bring in your own soapbox and pitch your sale. Then the pitchers of beer were free for the night.

My platform was a pantene pro-v box with 2x4's supporting it, cause that was when i still had gorgeous ass length hair, and my pitch was that I would make all hard drugs ( heroin, coke, meth, acid, etc.) over the counter and cheap, then quadruple the size of the city sanitation staff to clean up the bodies. i mean mess.

I propose something similar, outrgeously powerful drugs, with heavy side effects, including options of immediate and random self destructing. And visuals. I would totally and repeadtedly hop in BS's, smack up my pod and GF myself in psychedelic awesomeness.

Bonus points if you can load the drugs in a weapon like holiday launchers. Once you hit hull, launch the chemical party favors and they start tripping balls. Preferably strobing balls of exploding LOLs.

I was convincing with my pitch that night, I got free drinks for a week after. and they changed the pre-reqs to run for mayor.

Use the force without consent and the court wont acquit you even if you are a card carryin', robe wearin' Jedi.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#32 - 2015-11-26 00:07:55 UTC
Zimmer Jones wrote:
Once upon a time I ran for mayor of a city. It was really just a way to get free drinks. You had to fill out the application form, bring in your own soapbox and pitch your sale. Then the pitchers of beer were free for the night.

My platform was a pantene pro-v box with 2x4's supporting it, cause that was when i still had gorgeous ass length hair, and my pitch was that I would make all hard drugs ( heroin, coke, meth, acid, etc.) over the counter and cheap, then quadruple the size of the city sanitation staff to clean up the bodies. i mean mess.

I propose something similar, outrgeously powerful drugs, with heavy side effects, including options of immediate and random self destructing. And visuals. I would totally and repeadtedly hop in BS's, smack up my pod and GF myself in psychedelic awesomeness.

Bonus points if you can load the drugs in a weapon like holiday launchers. Once you hit hull, launch the chemical party favors and they start tripping balls. Preferably strobing balls of exploding LOLs.

I was convincing with my pitch that night, I got free drinks for a week after. and they changed the pre-reqs to run for mayor.


Dude, I'd vote for you.

Hell I'd vote for this in game too.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#33 - 2015-11-26 00:15:29 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:


Blowing stuff up does not improve the economy, except for mineral markets. It can be made to be a sink by adjusting manufacturing away from harvested resources and instead require seeded materials purchased with ISK. This will harm mineral markets but improve the loss of ISK from the game.


Mike and I, more often than not, do not agree...but on this point we do agree.

If we increased various fees and taxes to manufacturing and invention it would increase the amount of ISK sunk from the economy. Adding in items bought from NPCs would do the same thing.

However, adding on taxes and fees would simple shrink the size of the various markets. Both buyers and sellers would be negatively impacted.

Look, in economics the simplest way to slow down the money supply growth rate is to slow down the rate at which money is printed.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#34 - 2015-11-26 00:55:04 UTC
Remove incursions and ratting titans, economy fixed.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
Capsuleer Service Executive
Nornir Research
#35 - 2015-11-26 00:56:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Capsuleer Service Executive
Howdy all:

I was actually thinking about ISK sinks last night, so, what the hell...I'll post some.

1 - Corp logo change fee. People change corp logos A LOT. Some corps I had back in the day I was never happy, and fooled with it a bunch. 100 ISK? Are you kidding? Make logo changes 10,000 ISK. Or more.

2- Corp formation fee. Increase to 10 million ISK.

3- Alliance creation fee. Increase to 2 billion ISK.

4 - Share registration fee. You get 1000 shares when you make a corp. New shares have a fee applied. You think the SEC lets companies file shelf registrations for free?

I also like NPC station docking fees, based on system population. But thats for later.

/cse

EACS™ - Estel Arador Capsuleer & Corp Services - Spreading the Love
Capsuleer Service Executive
Nornir Research
#36 - 2015-11-26 01:01:49 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
Remove incursions and ratting titans, economy fixed.


This.

EACS™ - Estel Arador Capsuleer & Corp Services - Spreading the Love
Bobb Bobbington
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#37 - 2015-11-26 03:10:35 UTC
Okay, the people arguing about what is and what is not an isk faucet, I have a handy little link for you all. Blowing up ships is not, in fact, an isk sink. It is a small isk faucet due to the insurance overcoming the tax of manufacturing in most stations.

Also, I don't see how consumables would be an isk sink unless they were bought directly from npc sell orders, taking the "free" out of "free player economy". I suppose if you used LP they would be, but there's already consumables to buy, faction ammo, navy cap charges, etc, so I believe it would only increase the cost of those items due to more LP demand, unless the supply of LP also increased at the same rate as the demand for LP.

This is a signature.

It has a 25m signature.

No it's not a cosmic signature.

Probably.

Btw my corp's recruiting.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#38 - 2015-11-26 03:35:03 UTC
Bobb Bobbington wrote:
Okay, the people arguing about what is and what is not an isk faucet, I have a handy little link for you all. Blowing up ships is not, in fact, an isk sink. It is a small isk faucet due to the insurance overcoming the tax of manufacturing in most stations.

Also, I don't see how consumables would be an isk sink unless they were bought directly from npc sell orders, taking the "free" out of "free player economy". I suppose if you used LP they would be, but there's already consumables to buy, faction ammo, navy cap charges, etc, so I believe it would only increase the cost of those items due to more LP demand, unless the supply of LP also increased at the same rate as the demand for LP.


Yep, once you factor in insurance blowing up ships it is an isk faucet.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Zimmer Jones
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#39 - 2015-11-26 03:45:05 UTC
Thanks for the link Bobb, interesting stuff

Use the force without consent and the court wont acquit you even if you are a card carryin', robe wearin' Jedi.
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#40 - 2015-11-26 04:33:02 UTC
Bobb Bobbington wrote:
Okay, the people arguing about what is and what is not an isk faucet, I have a handy little link for you all. Blowing up ships is not, in fact, an isk sink. It is a small isk faucet due to the insurance overcoming the tax of manufacturing in most stations.

Also, I don't see how consumables would be an isk sink unless they were bought directly from npc sell orders, taking the "free" out of "free player economy". I suppose if you used LP they would be, but there's already consumables to buy, faction ammo, navy cap charges, etc, so I believe it would only increase the cost of those items due to more LP demand, unless the supply of LP also increased at the same rate as the demand for LP.


You are correct that consumables aren't necessarily a sink if they are manufactured from harvested materials. If there were more added to be a sink I would suggest they not overlap with current drugs.

Technically all the ships and modules are consumables as well, though not in the sense that they are one use temporary items. In all cases their manufacturing can be made to include isk in some way sufficient to make them sinks. This would be a trade off on who you want to annoy- consumers who now pay more for the same items due to added costs, or harvesters whos tradestock just devalued to make room for isk purchased materials.

However, I would like to point out that the data shows PLEX prices as inflating independant of the overall market, so the OP is off the mark on using sinks to reduce PLEX prices. Ships, modules, and other goods have been reletively stable with inflation, but PLEX are way off that scale. Plex trade more like a luxury, with its price not firmly attached to supply or demand.