These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

How do we tackle inflation.

Author
Opertone
State War Academy
Caldari State
#21 - 2012-11-02 12:43:37 UTC
You may want to improve the supply of items, compared to the supply of ISK.

While items are player made and have limited lifetime, ISK is made by players, but can not technically be removed by players. Only NPCs, such as brokers and LP stores can take the isk away from the system.

ISK can not be permanently used up all that easily. And also ISK has limited offers from NPCs, = medical clones, skills books, wars, lp stores, taxes. IMHO, isk needs to have more application, so that the ISK base doens't grow

This post sums up why the 'best' work with DCM inc.

WARP DRIVE makes eve boring

really - add warping align time 300% on gun aggression and eve becomes great again

Gillia Winddancer
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2012-11-02 12:48:04 UTC
Best way is to figure out how to implement features that can be rented for ISK. From really cheap stuff to ludicrously expensive stuff.

The catch is of course that said features must actually be useful in some way or form as well. Or alternatively be vanity based.

Frankly I even went as far as to think about letting players deal with station services and station infrastructure in some way or form. Don't have any solid idea on how such a thing would work though. The general idea would be however that players themselves set up station services for a time-based fee and in return make some money out of it should said services be sufficiently used by other players.

Drawbacks are numerous at this point though. Would it be a first player come first player served? If so then 4-4 in Jita would probably be numero uno pick and whoever takes it would never give it up. On the other hand, should it be a "shared" feature of sorts where the more players pitch in on a specific facility the less each player pays per month but also earns less due to split profits? That doesn't sound too great either. And regardless of which, thanks to the way gates and traffic works, backwater systems will be non-profitable regardless.

But in a way I still think that something like this would make for excellent isk sinks.



Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#23 - 2012-11-02 12:49:08 UTC
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#24 - 2012-11-02 12:51:10 UTC
personal hangers for a fee?

Blink

A million a month per station you have it activated in.

Entirely optional, and a low enough fee that people will just pay it.

Maybe have the fee go up in popular stations, capping out at 5 million?

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#25 - 2012-11-02 12:51:34 UTC
Gillia Winddancer wrote:
Best way is to figure out how to implement features that can be rented for ISK. From really cheap stuff to ludicrously expensive stuff.

The catch is of course that said features must actually be useful in some way or form as well. Or alternatively be vanity based.

Frankly I even went as far as to think about letting players deal with station services and station infrastructure in some way or form. Don't have any solid idea on how such a thing would work though. The general idea would be however that players themselves set up station services for a time-based fee and in return make some money out of it should said services be sufficiently used by other players.

Drawbacks are numerous at this point though. Would it be a first player come first player served? If so then 4-4 in Jita would probably be numero uno pick and whoever takes it would never give it up. On the other hand, should it be a "shared" feature of sorts where the more players pitch in on a specific facility the less each player pays per month but also earns less due to split profits? That doesn't sound too great either. And regardless of which, thanks to the way gates and traffic works, backwater systems will be non-profitable regardless.

But in a way I still think that something like this would make for excellent isk sinks.



Incentive more dudes to travel with dozens plex in their shuttle hold will definitively remove isk from the game. Lol

brb

Warp Planet6
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#26 - 2012-11-02 13:05:33 UTC
PLEX should cost more ISK. Let's get it done, peeps.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#27 - 2012-11-02 13:11:35 UTC
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
Incentive more dudes to travel with dozens plex in their shuttle hold will definitively remove isk from the game. Lol
Nah. After they get burned a couple of times, they'll stop buying them. No sales = no tax = no sink.
Speedkermit Damo
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2012-11-02 17:43:41 UTC
Perhaps CCP could add the option of being able to spend billions and billions of ISK on useless public sector workers.

Think of it. Not being able to undock without a heath and safety permit.

Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.

Corvus Idolon
Idolon Industries
#29 - 2012-11-02 18:07:19 UTC
Speedkermit Damo wrote:
Perhaps CCP could add the option of being able to spend billions and billions of ISK on useless public sector workers.

Think of it. Not being able to undock without a heath and safety permit.



Shocked Only if we are able to pay extra to watch them be shoved out an airlock. Hell just make the door in the captains quarters into an airlock we can pay to shove people out. 1-5 million per person?
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
#30 - 2012-11-02 18:12:08 UTC
I would personally tackle inflation with a Malediction...and preferably in a belt, then I would ransom inflation, and then honor that ransom.

Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?

Random Majere
Rogue Fleet
#31 - 2012-11-02 18:18:22 UTC
You fight inflation by raising interest rates Roll
Anslo
Scope Works
#32 - 2012-11-02 18:25:04 UTC
In-game FiS services. We see NPCs like haulers and such all the time. In the X series, you can set up automated trade routes. While total automation is not good for Eve...you could balance it.

Automated transports could be limited in size and be more expensive in service, and ONLY offered for shuttling things around in system. Traders and missioners, even pvpers could benefit from something like that.

You could also pay for NPC mercs, all be it limited by sec status (highsec-frigs and dessies @ max 10 units on the field every hour, lowsec- +cruisers and destroyers @ max 10-15 units on the field every hour, nulsec- all non capitals @ max 15-20 units on the field for every hour). Granted this could be VERY exploitable in wars but...just throwing the idea out there for modification.

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]

Beekeeper Bob
Beekeepers Anonymous
#33 - 2012-11-02 18:36:18 UTC
You are making the assumption that CCP does not want inflation? Shocked

Signature removed - CCP Eterne

Gussarde en Welle
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2012-11-02 18:42:10 UTC
I've been saying this on many other threads:

1. Ship maintenance costs - bigger ships need more maintenance
2. Planetary colonies and stations consume tradeable commodities
Anslo
Scope Works
#35 - 2012-11-02 18:43:50 UTC
Gussarde en Welle wrote:
I've been saying this on many other threads:

1. Ship maintenance costs - bigger ships need more maintenance
2. Planetary colonies and stations consume tradeable commodities


I kind of agree with this....how do those workers work without food or toiletries...or X-rated holoreels! Shocked

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]

Gussarde en Welle
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2012-11-02 18:59:15 UTC
Anslo wrote:
Gussarde en Welle wrote:
I've been saying this on many other threads:

1. Ship maintenance costs - bigger ships need more maintenance
2. Planetary colonies and stations consume tradeable commodities


I kind of agree with this....how do those workers work without food or toiletries...or X-rated holoreels! Shocked


I have a feeling that the reason this hasn't been done yet is that CCP fears howls of rage from PvPers. The thing is this: PvPers go through ships like Cher goes through men. They wouldn't be paying much in maintenance fees.

The other potential argument is that the ships repair themselves - agreed, maybe - but nuclear reactors and capacitors can't possibly be repaired without drydocking the ship and taking it apart! Take it from someone that knows, you can't run fusion reactors without ever maintaining them.

And in any case, where do the materials for repair and electronics components come from? Are they assembled inside the ship?

There's a huge potential sink that the game just ignores.

No More Heroes
Boomer Humor
Snuffed Out
#37 - 2012-11-02 19:01:05 UTC
100% real talk:

1. Move level 4 missions to low sec.

2. Move all ice to null sec.

3. Nerf high sec mining.

4. Nerf blue loot from wormholes.

.

Reticle
Sight Picture
#38 - 2012-11-02 19:01:10 UTC
there are all sorts of ways to tackle. just make sure no helmet to helmet contact or you'll get a penalty flag thrown
Reticle
Sight Picture
#39 - 2012-11-02 19:02:12 UTC
No More Heroes wrote:
100% real talk:

1. Move level 4 missions to low sec.

2. Move all ice to null sec.

3. Nerf high sec mining.

4. Nerf blue loot from wormholes.

Nerf tech moons, raise alliance and sov costs
No More Heroes
Boomer Humor
Snuffed Out
#40 - 2012-11-02 19:03:58 UTC
Reticle wrote:
No More Heroes wrote:
100% real talk:

1. Move level 4 missions to low sec.

2. Move all ice to null sec.

3. Nerf high sec mining.

4. Nerf blue loot from wormholes.

Nerf tech moons, raise alliance and sov costs


They did that, did that, and did that. Has nothing to do with inflation.

.