These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Fred's second-hand shoppe

Author
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#1 - 2012-10-31 21:07:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Touval Lysander
I remember a long time back there was a corp selling second-hand ships.

I'm not sure how well that business went. Advertising things that were in fact brand new as second-hand is probably not the best business model one could think of.

I had a freighter I paid 800m for over 12 months. It did hundreds of jumps, bumped into gates, stations, ships all kinds of things. It endured the rigours of warp space travel so well that I sold it for 1.2b after I came back from a 4 month break.

It never cost a single isk in all that time for maintenance/repair.

Nothing loses value over time. Pos's, ships, modules, drones... There are maintenance bills for some things, sure, but maintenance should not stop ageing of assets.

- Is depreciation of assets over time a good isk sink?
- Would it be a passive and consistent market-driver? (eg: when PvP is not killing enough ships by itself)
- Can some arbitrary wear-and-tear (eg: ehp reduction?) factor be built in?


Your thoughts....


Addendum: It was pointed out that losing effectiveness "permanently" overtime is bad and I agree.

Thus, the idea might be that depreciation escalates maintenance costs to keep the ship at 100% effectiveness. The older the ship the more it costs to fix. Replacement at some point is inevitable. It becomes both a good sink (maintenance) and a boost to the player economy (replacement).

(by default, it also creates a whole new "industry" - that of the "second-hand dealer".)

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."

Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#2 - 2012-10-31 21:11:11 UTC
It would make sense that there should be maintenance, refitting and refuelling costs.
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#3 - 2012-10-31 21:13:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Epeen
If there is one priority that CCP needs to focus on, it's ISK. They need to turn off the taps and pull the plug to start draining some out of the economy.

Degradation of stuff and the required payment to keep it in top shape is certainly one way to do that.

Mr Epeen Cool
Dave stark
#4 - 2012-10-31 21:14:58 UTC
or charge isk based on the size of the ship when using gates. just like jump bridges.
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#5 - 2012-10-31 21:20:49 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
or charge isk based on the size of the ship when using gates. just like jump bridges.

i like.

jb's not neccessary tho' they already cost a LOT to own and run.

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."

Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#6 - 2012-10-31 21:22:24 UTC
Titans and supercarriers should have some decent upkeep to them, but other ships? Nah.
Dave stark
#7 - 2012-10-31 21:23:26 UTC
Touval Lysander wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
or charge isk based on the size of the ship when using gates. just like jump bridges.

i like.

jb's not neccessary tho' they already cost a LOT to own and run.


i meant, the isk charge changing based on the size of the ship. iirc it costs more fuel to use a jb with a freighter than a frig, for example.
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#8 - 2012-10-31 21:25:22 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
If there is one priority that CCP needs to focus on, it's ISK. They need to turn off the taps and pull the plug to start draining some out of the economy.

Degradation of stuff and the required payment to keep it in top shape is certainly one way to do that.

Mr Epeen Cool

Maintenance costs yes.

I'm also suggesting a depreciation that is "not preventable".

A frig bought last week might incur 1% depreciation of "ehp" for example.
At 90 days weeks it may have lost 20% of it's inherent ehp.

They truly become second-hand. Lack of maintenance might accelerate depreciation?

(numbers are random, out-of-air for argument sake btw)

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."

Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
#9 - 2012-10-31 21:25:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Roll Sizzle Beef
Would be something to think about once they get proper combat damage as showcased during Fanfest.
If the whole skin suffered visual wear and tear the more you used it without real detrimental effects, and you can "clean" it with the repair shop. That's one way to go about it.
Because if there was true stat adjustment, what would constitute wear and tear? The more times it suffered hull damage? More often than not, at that point, you will rarely escape and go "aww man, all my stats are down 5% because of heavy use..."
Hours spent in space? That's just punishing the players who play more. As if clone costs weren't enough punishment for that as it is. How about jump amount? A bit unfair to those in nul or low that end up traveling a ton for a fight. Bet I guess it could be adjusted so combat ships wear down far less often than say industrial. Then Industrial usage in high would likely see a constant isk drain if wear effected agility. Or if mining wear effected yield. Yet what about those in WH space? New POS redesign would help this but a hanger may not be acceptable for all POS sizes.

It would be a interesting mechanic for a sink. Yet the balance of annoyance and practical addition to the game is a bit sketchy. How often would it be deemed necessary? The actual cost. The effects to those that don't live in stations?
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#10 - 2012-10-31 21:26:34 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
Touval Lysander wrote:
Dave stark wrote:
or charge isk based on the size of the ship when using gates. just like jump bridges.

i like.

jb's not neccessary tho' they already cost a LOT to own and run.


i meant, the isk charge changing based on the size of the ship. iirc it costs more fuel to use a jb with a freighter than a frig, for example.

they do. big time.

try flipping a carrier thru a jb too many times. you'll get called out Blink

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."

NEONOVUS
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#11 - 2012-10-31 21:34:18 UTC
Dave stark wrote:
or charge isk based on the size of the ship when using gates. just like jump bridges.

would help but the station traders are a bit of the problem
Wealth centralization.
All that ISK is not spread out in EVE
There are specific groups with a majority.
Breaking them of all that ISK is the better plan.
A regressive tax basically.
Quite surprised it doesnt exist already given how effective they are in real life at preventing centralization.
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#12 - 2012-10-31 21:39:22 UTC
Touval Lysander wrote:
Mr Epeen wrote:
If there is one priority that CCP needs to focus on, it's ISK. They need to turn off the taps and pull the plug to start draining some out of the economy.

Degradation of stuff and the required payment to keep it in top shape is certainly one way to do that.

Mr Epeen Cool

Maintenance costs yes.

I'm also suggesting a depreciation that is "not preventable".

A frig bought last week might incur 1% depreciation of "ehp" for example.
At 90 days weeks it may have lost 20% of it's inherent ehp.

They truly become second-hand. Lack of maintenance might accelerate depreciation?

(numbers are random, out-of-air for argument sake btw)


I agree.

And this is coming from someone who is sitting on 60 billion plus worth of ship hulls. So it's not me wishing it on someone else. It's me accepting that it would be for the good of the game.

Mr Epeen Cool
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#13 - 2012-10-31 21:39:43 UTC
Roll Sizzle Beef wrote:

If the whole skin suffered visual wear and tear the more you used it without real detrimental effects, and you can "clean" it with the repair shop. That's one way to go about it.

Because if there was true stat adjustment, what would constitute wear and tear? The more times it suffered hull damage? More often than not, at that point, you will rarely escape and go "aww man, all my stats are down 5% because of heavy use..."

How about jump amount? A bit unfair to those in nul or low that end up traveling a ton for a fight.

Bet I guess it could be adjusted so combat ships wear down far less often than say industrial.

Then Industrial usage in high would likely see a constant isk drain if wear effected agility. Or if mining wear effected yield.

Yet what about those in WH space? New POS redesign would help this but a hanger may not be acceptable for all POS sizes.

It would be a interesting mechanic for a sink. Yet the balance of annoyance and practical addition to the game is a bit sketchy. How often would it be deemed necessary? The actual cost. The effects to those that don't live in stations?


Good questions.

Cleaning could be a good sink. "When/If" skins come out, be even more relevant?

High gate prices for jumps (not my idea but...) - I'd see that as a positive for massive fleets travelling 30-40 jumps to a fight. It would make blue bridges etc. more effective while red has to do it the hard way.

On ship combat effectiveness, I see this as being a bonus. Those that die less often will be flying in ships constantly falling apart around them. Be quite funny. I can see l33ts claiming they killed x flying a 34% combat reduced frig.

It'll become a new cult... (In Australia we have Mongrel Ute Gathering - the ugliest dirtiest nastiest ute - slang for utility - wins the prize! Serious...)

And yes, on inyd/barges etc. speed agaility and yield should be affected the longer you keep your ship "intact" as it were. Carebear Hulks will die - eventually......

And truly, in Eve, where can't a POS/station or something be found to dock occasionally. If you can't find one, you need a compass, not a maintenance bay.

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."

Dave stark
#14 - 2012-10-31 21:40:10 UTC
Touval Lysander wrote:
Mr Epeen wrote:
If there is one priority that CCP needs to focus on, it's ISK. They need to turn off the taps and pull the plug to start draining some out of the economy.

Degradation of stuff and the required payment to keep it in top shape is certainly one way to do that.

Mr Epeen Cool

Maintenance costs yes.

I'm also suggesting a depreciation that is "not preventable".

A frig bought last week might incur 1% depreciation of "ehp" for example.
At 90 days weeks it may have lost 20% of it's inherent ehp.

They truly become second-hand. Lack of maintenance might accelerate depreciation?

(numbers are random, out-of-air for argument sake btw)


having to buy a new ship every time there's a fleet forming so you're not flying something with 30k ehp when every one else is sitting pretty at nearly 100k or something in the same ship?

no thanks.

depreciation should only be included if it can be fixed in a station for a nominal isk cost, y'know like fixing heat damaged modules.
Inquisitor Kitchner
The Executives
#15 - 2012-10-31 21:41:27 UTC

This is a terrible idea. This game is complicated enough without having to micromanage about 22 ships too to make sure they haven't got a 10% "ship is too old to fly" penalty to EHP

"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli

Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#16 - 2012-10-31 21:42:08 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:

And this is coming from someone who is sitting on 60 billion plus worth of ship hulls. So it's not me wishing it on someone else. It's me accepting that it would be for the good of the game.
Mr Epeen Cool

Wasn't even something I considered. Perhaps it should only apply when xyz has been unpackaged/assembled?

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."

Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
#17 - 2012-10-31 21:46:29 UTC
People cant always find a hanger to repair at, ex: caps built in holes. Or super caps period
Horrible hassle to POS dwellers to cycle out ships to get them repaired after X amount of time.

Perhaps just launch it as visual cosmetic over hours played in space. And see how much everyone would actually spend to stay pretty.
And depending on its success and providing there is the ability that everyone could properly repair themselves no matter where they lived... experiment on real effects. Like those that always live in wormhole space could develop oiled sansha skins due to wormhole exposure and are repaired in wormhole. And if they could be sold as a Oiled Tengu. Perhaps there would be a whole new market of "used" trade rather than "look at how much less effective this well worn ship is".
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#18 - 2012-10-31 21:52:20 UTC
Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:

This is a terrible idea. This game is complicated enough without having to micromanage about 22 ships too to make sure they haven't got a 10% "ship is too old to fly" penalty to EHP

22 ships. All combat ships? All requiring 100% ehp/weapon effectiveness all the time?

But it's a good point if your garage is big and comprehensively filled with every type of ship.

Don't forget that the "other guy" faces exact same issues. It should never be a disadvantage to any party.


"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."

Casirio
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#19 - 2012-10-31 21:53:48 UTC
Having to pay to jump through a NPC stargate is the worst idea I've ever heard. Depreciation is one thing, I wouldnt mind seeing that. But it should be simple as repairing your ship in the repair shop, or having a specialized ship to do it for you (could be a new career.?) Eve should always be proactive about keeping isk in the hands of players not giving it to an NPC for no reason other than to make an isk sink...
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#20 - 2012-10-31 22:02:51 UTC
Casirio wrote:
Having to pay to jump through a NPC stargate is the worst idea I've ever heard. Depreciation is one thing, I wouldnt mind seeing that. But it should be simple as repairing your ship in the repair shop, or having a specialized ship to do it for you (could be a new career.?) Eve should always be proactive about keeping isk in the hands of players not giving it to an NPC for no reason other than to make an isk sink...

The idea of depreciation based on number of ships and how long you keep them as a sink is quite sound. Eve is about losing isk - in as greater quantities as you can possibly afford to lose.

Accumulation and risk aversion purely to "keep my isk" is killing the game tbh. Those that won't "lose" or "commit" ships to glorious space dust have it done "for them". Blink

Rich players with 100 ships gonna have high bills. Promotes specialisation?


Note: The -intent- of the thread is to thrash out ideas. A bad point might bring in someone's thoughts for a solution. That's what it's about. "Bad", "terrible" and "horrible" are only true when there is no solution to it being so.

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."

12Next page