These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Mad inflation

First post First post
Author
JitaPriceChecker2
Doomheim
#101 - 2012-03-12 18:22:47 UTC
CCP Soundwave wrote:


Someone already posted the numbers, the majority of isk in EVE comes off bounties and if anything, we should be reviewing the current bounties on battleship NPCs.


Fail.

Yes leave incursion as it is and nerf more income from ratting hahahahahaha
Endeavour Starfleet
#102 - 2012-03-12 18:23:32 UTC
CCP Soundwave wrote:
highonpop wrote:
CCP Soundwave wrote:
We're looking at the economy constantly and looking at our options.

One of the fundamental issues we have is that we're making everyone "better" at making money, so the effect kind of snowballs. Right now we're considering everything form increasing taxes to lowering bounties across the board.



or maybe do the 1 thing you KNOW will regulate the flow...

Switching Incursions from ISK to LP payout...


Or tell the Sansha to go home...


Incursions are not a big issue in terms of isk globally.



Thank you!

People crying left and right on the forums about so called Incursion inflation when in reality the amount from bounties is astronomically higher a good chunk of that due to nullsec botting.

How about these nullbears start reporting blue bots before screaming about incursions?
Ersteen Hofs
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#103 - 2012-03-12 18:24:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Ersteen Hofs
CCP Soundwave wrote:
We're looking at the economy constantly and looking at our options.

One of the fundamental issues we have is that we're making everyone "better" at making money, so the effect kind of snowballs. Right now we're considering everything form increasing taxes to lowering bounties across the board.

Why would you raise taxes? that will ONLY affect traders and manufacturers.

Lowering the amount of ISK injected into economy however will affect EVERYBODY since less ISK injected means less can be spent on covering the margins so the prices will naturally fall.

Please don't once again favor one group of the players over the others.
Ana Vyr
Vyral Technologies
#104 - 2012-03-12 18:24:32 UTC
So 80%ish of all the ISK income comes from rats?

But, wouldn't rat bounty income have remained roughly stable over the last few years? Why would that cause prices to explode?
Endeavour Starfleet
#105 - 2012-03-12 18:27:57 UTC
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Tippia wrote:
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Incursions are not a big issue in terms of isk globally.
You're going to have to elaborate on that one a bit.

Kile Kitmoore wrote:
Finally, NOW can we please stop the nerf Incursion threads!
Nope.
Quote:
As for the inflation, you wanted a mining buff here it is! Trit selling at 5 ISK a pop! Nice!
Inflation is not a mining buff since it doesn't mean mining is more worth-while.


Someone already posted the numbers, the majority of isk in EVE comes off bounties and if anything, we should be reviewing the current bounties on battleship NPCs.



Before you do anything which will get the CSM screaming. You need to look at the situation of nullsec botting. In my opinion.


I think you can lay most of the so called 1% Inflation on bots pounding 23/7 behind blue walls. You need to find a way to reward players who are willing to report blue bots and punish those who say to their members not to report. Right now it's too easy for these idiots to say "Its for teh ship replacement fund" like it is justification for not reporting.
Razin
The Scope
#106 - 2012-03-12 18:28:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Razin
Zircon Dasher wrote:
For those discussing the insurance faucet:

~3.4T payed out
~1.6T payed in

So insurance injected about 1.8T in Feb.

The 'insurance payout' faucet encourages risky gameplay and is pretty well moderated by the 'insurance cost' sink; while nothing is moderating the bounty/Incursion monster that exists purely for wealth accumulation without providing any compelling gameplay.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#107 - 2012-03-12 18:28:50 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
People crying left and right on the forums about so called Incursion inflation when in reality the amount from bounties is astronomically higher a good chunk of that due to nullsec botting.
…except that three times higher is not “astronomical” and that the inflation existed before incursions. So guess what happens when incursions are piled on top of it all?
JitaPriceChecker2
Doomheim
#108 - 2012-03-12 18:29:58 UTC
Ana Vyr wrote:
So 80%ish of all the ISK income comes from rats?

But, wouldn't rat bounty income have remained roughly stable over the last few years? Why would that cause prices to explode?


Because people fail at arithmetics and dont understand that 16% increase isk generation(incursions) can actually mean multiplying by a huge factor isk that stays in the economy

Endeavour Starfleet
#109 - 2012-03-12 18:31:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Endeavour Starfleet
JitaPriceChecker2 wrote:
Ana Vyr wrote:
So 80%ish of all the ISK income comes from rats?

But, wouldn't rat bounty income have remained roughly stable over the last few years? Why would that cause prices to explode?


Because people fail at arithmetics and dont understand that 16% increase isk generation(incursions) can actually mean multiplying by a huge factor isk that stays in the economy




Except that "some" people fail to realize in this very same topic CCP said Incursions arent the problem.

Tippia wrote:
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
People crying left and right on the forums about so called Incursion inflation when in reality the amount from bounties is astronomically higher a good chunk of that due to nullsec botting.
…except that three times higher is not “astronomical” and that the inflation existed before incursions. So guess what happens when incursions are piled on top of it all?


Should I quote CCP about Incursions again? They aren't the issue here.
Zircon Dasher
#110 - 2012-03-12 18:33:49 UTC
Tippia wrote:
if people are abandoning an infinite ISK source to get to it, it is a cause for worry since it tells us that we're nowhere near that yet and it's already a significant contributor to the ISK supply.


Not necessarily.

You may have a situation where the minimum number of people needed to harvest 100% of the total possible ISK (perfect efficiency) gives a greater ISK/hr than missions/ratting/etc

So long as the ISK/hr is greater people will move to incursions. Meaning that the distribution of total possible ISK is spread across more players, and yet the total injection remains the same.

This is all theory, given that we do not know the distribution of incursion ISK across security. IF incursions are only being run in highsec....ever.... then there is significant room for more injection once people start running them in low/null. However, when an incursion pops up in your deep-blue 0.0 sov sys it would be silly not to farm it like crazy (little risk) so I can only assume that SOME of the feb numbers include 0.0 space.

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.

Zircon Dasher
#111 - 2012-03-12 18:37:54 UTC
gfldex wrote:
Zircon Dasher wrote:
Assuming, that is, that there are not intangible benefits also created by incursion running.


And there is one. Your sec status goes up quite nicely when you pop Sansha BS. So one could very well keep running Incursions even if the wallet is about to explode already.


Fun is another.

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.

JitaPriceChecker2
Doomheim
#112 - 2012-03-12 18:38:43 UTC  |  Edited by: JitaPriceChecker2
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
JitaPriceChecker2 wrote:
Ana Vyr wrote:
So 80%ish of all the ISK income comes from rats?

But, wouldn't rat bounty income have remained roughly stable over the last few years? Why would that cause prices to explode?


Because people fail at arithmetics and dont understand that 16% increase isk generation(incursions) can actually mean multiplying by a huge factor isk that stays in the economy




Except that "some" people fail to realize in this very same topic CCP said Incursions arent the problem.

Tippia wrote:
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
People crying left and right on the forums about so called Incursion inflation when in reality the amount from bounties is astronomically higher a good chunk of that due to nullsec botting.
…except that three times higher is not “astronomical” and that the inflation existed before incursions. So guess what happens when incursions are piled on top of it all?


Should I quote CCP about Incursions again? They aren't the issue here.


Because they dont understand this concept obviously neither do you.

if for 100isk generated 80isk was sinked after incursion for 118isk generated 80 was sinked which basically means doubling amount of money that stays in the economy.

That is the reasons for sudden spike in inflation and in past bounties didnt have that much effect.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#113 - 2012-03-12 18:40:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Should I quote CCP about Incursions again? They aren't the issue here.
You can quote it as much as you like. It doesn't change that what you said was spectacularly wrong.

Oh, nad incursions most certainly are an issue, since they are a significant ISK faucet that contributes to that inflation.

Zircon Dasher wrote:
This is all theory, given that we do not know the distribution of incursion ISK across security. IF incursions are only being run in highsec....ever.... then there is significant room for more injection once people start running them in low/null.
As luck would have it, we do know that. Even if we assume that the highsec incursions are run at max efficiency, there's still roughly twice as much in untapped incursion income waiting in the system…
Endeavour Starfleet
#114 - 2012-03-12 18:44:17 UTC
Zircon Dasher wrote:
Tippia wrote:
if people are abandoning an infinite ISK source to get to it, it is a cause for worry since it tells us that we're nowhere near that yet and it's already a significant contributor to the ISK supply.


Not necessarily.

You may have a situation where the minimum number of people needed to harvest 100% of the total possible ISK (perfect efficiency) gives a greater ISK/hr than missions/ratting/etc

So long as the ISK/hr is greater people will move to incursions. Meaning that the distribution of total possible ISK is spread across more players, and yet the total injection remains the same.

This is all theory, given that we do not know the distribution of incursion ISK across security. IF incursions are only being run in highsec....ever.... then there is significant room for more injection once people start running them in low/null. However, when an incursion pops up in your deep-blue 0.0 sov sys it would be silly not to farm it like crazy (little risk) so I can only assume that SOME of the feb numbers include 0.0 space.


Some of em do come from null and some love to run them when they arrive. However the many that don't despite the huge income factor in my opinion shows the extent of botting out there.

They can't even be bothered to get a fleet to remove the incursion which takes half a day at most counting time to get the bar to blue. Their bots just move to somewhere else.

With more reporting of blue bots and action I think you just might see them run more again and many that run in hisec will come back to run them with their alliance.
Adunh Slavy
#115 - 2012-03-12 18:45:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Adunh Slavy
CCP Soundwave wrote:
We're looking at the economy constantly and looking at our options.

One of the fundamental issues we have is that we're making everyone "better" at making money, so the effect kind of snowballs. Right now we're considering everything form increasing taxes to lowering bounties across the board.


If you want to stop inflation, you need to let inflation run its course in some sectors of the economy, the systemic imbalances are what need fixing. Make the use of ISK faucets more expensive in terms of materials consumed, and do it in a way that doesn't freak out carebears and lead to mass whines by blowing up ships from overly aggressive NPCs. One of the best ways I have seen suggested is material consumption via active modules, and that may help balance out some of the PVP issues as well.

Activities that do not create ISK from the faucets need a bump, but this does not mean allow some player to create more trit or moon goo. Stop dropping loot that can be refined, (drone poo change is a good start, adding ISK to drones however is a half step back but an easy fix so understandable). Create consumable goods, increase the mineral requirements of ammo, add some PI into ship building, lower end moon goo, add fuel to ABs and MWDs, charges for shied boosters and armour reps, multi-tier T1 production like T2 uses, etc. Increase consumption of raw materials by means other than just ships blowing up.

There is a significant portion of the player base that never goes out to PVP - this means they are not blowing things up. Eve's economy works because, in Eve, the Broken Window Fallacy, is not a fallacy, but that is true only up to a point. Not enough windows are breaking and all attempts at getting people to break more windows has failed, because for many individuals, not having windows broken on your own house is good thing. So ... if we can't get more windows to break, use more coal in the fire when making the glass.

The value in terms of time, of activities that are not sucking at the giant ISK tit, need to increase. The most useful sinks you could increase are material sinks.

Slowing down how much ISK enters the economy, will not fix the imbalances. All it will do is concentrate wealth in the hands of those who already have massive reserves. Increasing this sink or that sink will only push people away from those activities and create further imbalances in the economy.

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

Endeavour Starfleet
#116 - 2012-03-12 18:49:20 UTC
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Incursions are not a big issue in terms of isk globally.


CCP Soundwave wrote:
Someone already posted the numbers, the majority of isk in EVE comes off bounties and if anything, we should be reviewing the current bounties on battleship NPCs.



Sorry to quote it again but some here just don't get the point. Incursions are not the issue. And yes they have ALOT more data than you considering they WORK for the company.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#117 - 2012-03-12 18:52:09 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Sorry to quote it again but some here just don't get the point.
You being the chief among them… if you can't argue the issues being presented, just pipe down.

Quote:
they have ALOT more data than you considering they WORK for the company.
You'd think they wouldn't have to rely on player-provided data to make the point, then, wouldn't you?
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#118 - 2012-03-12 18:55:50 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Incursions are not a big issue in terms of isk globally.


CCP Soundwave wrote:
Someone already posted the numbers, the majority of isk in EVE comes off bounties and if anything, we should be reviewing the current bounties on battleship NPCs.



Sorry to quote it again but some here just don't get the point. Incursions are not the issue. And yes they have ALOT more data than you considering they WORK for the company.


CCP is known for making excellent decisions in the past regarding income sources.

See the 2011 anomaly and jump bridge nerf which revitalized nullsec.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

JitaPriceChecker2
Doomheim
#119 - 2012-03-12 18:56:53 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Incursions are not a big issue in terms of isk globally.


CCP Soundwave wrote:
Someone already posted the numbers, the majority of isk in EVE comes off bounties and if anything, we should be reviewing the current bounties on battleship NPCs.



Sorry to quote it again but some here just don't get the point. Incursions are not the issue. And yes they have ALOT more data than you considering they WORK for the company.


Well as stated they fail on arithmetics or have some super secret data that makes current calculations obsolete.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#120 - 2012-03-12 18:58:36 UTC
Seriously any post by Endeavour Starfleet in threads about incursions should just be glossed over entirely because he doesn't want his risk-free 150m ISK/hour fountain touched

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar