These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123
 

Monthly Economic Report - March 2017

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#41 - 2017-04-29 01:02:10 UTC
CCP Quant wrote:

It's an interesting proposal, I'll need to pick CCP Tuxford's brain on spawn mechanics to see if this is possible. That being said, is it really close to reality to report estimated total remaining amounts of raw resources? I've got a feeling the diamond industry (to name one) secretly disagrees Smile I guess we could compare mining output to the theoretical maximum volume that spawns to make an estimated "utilisation ratio" ?

Wouldn't this totally be wrong for null security space anyway. Since industrial anoms respawn when mined, so the fact you mine in an area makes more value spawn to replace it.
So amount mined is a more 'realistic' counter for EVE.
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec
Invisible Exchequer
#42 - 2017-04-29 13:28:58 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
CCP Quant wrote:

It's an interesting proposal, I'll need to pick CCP Tuxford's brain on spawn mechanics to see if this is possible. That being said, is it really close to reality to report estimated total remaining amounts of raw resources? I've got a feeling the diamond industry (to name one) secretly disagrees Smile I guess we could compare mining output to the theoretical maximum volume that spawns to make an estimated "utilisation ratio" ?

Wouldn't this totally be wrong for null security space anyway. Since industrial anoms respawn when mined, so the fact you mine in an area makes more value spawn to replace it.
So amount mined is a more 'realistic' counter for EVE.


It ties into the problem with spawn frequency. Ideally volumes and values spawned in space should be bigger and more valuable but spawn and lower and diminshing returns frequency.

The problem is we currently have close to infinite minerals available, the lack of strain and bottle necks on the creation side, is reducing the "motivation/incentives" in EVE.

We need less selfsufficiency and more latteral integration and thus trade balances developed.
Aischa Montagne
Blut-Klauen-Clan
#43 - 2017-04-29 16:31:07 UTC
Thanks for the market breakdown. Very intersting paper as always.

Also I liked the excursion on whats going on out of the view of business.
I would like to give my 2 cents.

New Currency "Plex"
New Currency Plex I refer to as PLEX 2.0
The Old "30 days Pilot's License Extention" or short PLEX is refered to as PLEX 1.0

So for me the PLEX 2.0 is more like a renamed AURUM. The main difference between PLEX 2.0 and 1.0 is the focus what you can buy with it. PLEX 1.0 was focused on the License we all buy in order to be able to access our Hangars.
PLEX 2.0 is realy just a new word for AURUM which merges the features from PLEX 1.0

I still think to keep the name PLEX is a major failure, negating the Name and the history what PLEX is. So I think it is wrong to calculate the history for something that has not existed. If traders think they need historic numbers, they can calculate for themselfs and see the effects. This artificial history is a Mindgame and it is a wrong mindgame too.

Regional STATs:

Not a whormhouler, but In my Opinion let the people decide, unlike High sec other systems are not under juristiction of any State. Maybe the Sisters of Eve can provide a deploy able structure that collects zensus data of the region. One Zensus collector is sufficient to have the data. If a sector outside of highsec does not deploy it, no regional Numbers are available. If in a particular time no census has been monitored, non will be calcualted and available. Period.
In some regions the calculation of these data makes no sense.
(Could also be a point to fight for.)

---
NPC Bounties:
Sure if you can afford the CPU power to add this number.

---
Implementation of Financial instruments in EVE

That sounds interesting.
I have another whish if you think in this way. Make shares tradeable on the market. I think this will have a interesting twist.
Shares that should be tradeable call then public shares, and have to be transformed from private shares (we have now)

I think that is easy to do and even an very interesting move.
---

Again please take my gratitude for your work.

All the best
Aischa Montagne
Leader of the Blood claw Clan
Josef Djugashvilis
#44 - 2017-05-01 15:22:34 UTC
Fade Toblack wrote:
Lieutenant Berrendo wrote:
We are talking about monolpoly money smart guy.


See: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-37385555

Real-life prosecutions are taking place over betting for virtual items. I'm sure that CCP don't want to run foul of the law in the UK - especially as they have business interests in the country.


I have long argued that as Eve Online allows 13 year old children to play; gambling is a potentially serious problem.

It is not hard to see that children being allowed to gamble for shiny toys in Eve may lead to gambling for money in real life.

If folk over the age of 18 (or whatever the age of legal adulthood is where you live) want to gamble then fine, I am just not happy about 13 year old children being allowed to do so.

Not that it affects me on a personal level, both of my children are in their mid thirties.

However I do believe that children being allowed to gamble in Eve may come back to haunt CCP.

This is not a signature.
Previous page123