These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 SINKS WE NEED - Post your ideas here.

First post
Author
Lidia Caderu
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
#101 - 2014-11-24 14:36:31 UTC
Quote:
F2P is a ******* scourge on the face of real gaming

Lol you are a real r****d :))))
Anthar Thebess
#102 - 2014-11-24 14:37:46 UTC
afkalt wrote:
Lidia Caderu wrote:
afkalt wrote:
So I repeat.....who cares?

What is the problem and what does it matter? People have to loot more? Good, creates more opportunities for player interaction, better lifestyle for ninjas. More "loss" immediately warping out the minute someone hits local.

Well as I've said somebody will just leave and game will get just more boring.


Why leave? Because you need to pay to play the game?

Good. F2P is a ******* scourge on the face of real gaming and needs to be exterminated with extreme prejudice.


Or is it because stopping to loot is "hard"?


You are getting this totally wrong way.
Remember that this is game, not work.
Many , if not most , of eve players don't have 19 years any more.
They have work , families.

Sorry but the for me, and for many people the moment i will have to buy PLEX from CCP just to have isk to afford ships will be the last day you will see me on server.

This thread is not about this, F2P or Plex prices.

This thread is how to remove isk flowing into the system.
Isk that is created from nowhere and where most of it should land at the end.

afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#103 - 2014-11-24 14:40:20 UTC  |  Edited by: afkalt
Maybe newbros shouldn't be looking at battleships then? If you can only make 10m/hour, you'll lose 150m-300m per hour the minute you sit in that shiny BS and have it blow the hell out from under you.

If poor newbro is a miner (the only thing I can think of making such poor isk) making 10m/hour and things triple in cost, why would be not then make 30m/hour thus keeping the relative cost the same?

Perhaps, if inflation pushes everything 3x more expensive but your income remains constant perhaps it is time to revisit your efficiency?


edit: TL;RD: Stop thinking "isk/hour" and start thinking "assets/hour"
Anthar Thebess
#104 - 2014-11-24 14:54:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Anthar Thebess
afkalt wrote:
Maybe newbros shouldn't be looking at battleships then?

When you come to eve you want to fly bigger and bigger ships.
I still remember my first cruiser, battlecruiser ...
Over the years and experience you learn that smaller signature is important , and when you skill up a bit , you can have similar DPS on proper ships.

So please post your ideas about possible ISK sinks , rather than talkin how PLEX is expensive , and how you don't care that every thing is getting more and more expensive ( while the VALUE stay the same).

afkalt wrote:
edit: TL;RD: Stop thinking "isk/hour" and start thinking "assets/hour"

That is the point of why we need isk sinks.

Because inflation every month you can buy less assets/hour than in the previous month.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#105 - 2014-11-24 15:11:43 UTC  |  Edited by: afkalt
Anthar Thebess wrote:

afkalt wrote:
edit: TL;RD: Stop thinking "isk/hour" and start thinking "assets/hour"

That is the point of why we need isk sinks.

Because inflation every month you can buy less assets/hour than in the previous month.


I fail to see how I can make this any clearer, you're just missing my point.

If I loot 75m per hour in drops today and a battleship costs 150m then two hours of loot generation gets me it

Let's say hyperinflation hits tomorrow then tomorrow and the battleship costs 1,500m but remember the same thing affects drops so I'm now looting 750m per hour in drops.....it takes me two hours to afford the battleship. Same as before.


What will happen is bounty farming will slowly give ground to bounty and loot farming.


Asset generation stays consistent, affordability stays broadly consistent. Supply and demand will level it off, there will hit a point where people wont go beyond for an item as inflation outpaces isk facuets and liquid isk stockpiles transfer to assets, then it'll settle down to a norm.

Point being, it's not really going to hurt newbies, or anyone else for that matter. Maybe the NPCs seeding titan skill books ;)
Phaade
LowKey Ops
Shadow Cartel
#106 - 2014-11-24 17:01:20 UTC
PVP can be enough of an isk sink as it is. Calling ship insurance an isk faucet is laughable; it's the only reason many people will take out expensive or big ships. I dunno about you, but I refuse to grind red crosses to replace 300 mil losses.

Solution is simple, less hi security space, more low security space and less zero risk income. Yeah, Nullsec is safer than Hisec but that's a much larger problem CCP has created.

There isn't enough low sec outside of FW space.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#107 - 2014-11-24 20:43:19 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:
afkalt wrote:
Maybe newbros shouldn't be looking at battleships then?

When you come to eve you want to fly bigger and bigger ships.
I still remember my first cruiser, battlecruiser ....


Actually I've only ever wanted to fly a ship that's 'fit for purpose' in my current activities and have yet to fly a BS even though I can.

Back on post I don't see any rampant inflation so far if you set aside plex. Last major price jump I noticed was on AFs and pirate frigs when burnermissions were introduced and that was simply supply and demand in action. No issues for me here at all so -1.

Gadget Helmsdottir
Gadget's Workshop
#108 - 2014-11-24 22:48:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Gadget Helmsdottir
Phaade wrote:
PVP can be enough of an isk sink as it is. Calling ship insurance an isk faucet is laughable; it's the only reason many people will take out expensive or big ships. I dunno about you, but I refuse to grind red crosses to replace 300 mil losses.

Solution is simple, less hi security space, more low security space and less zero risk income. Yeah, Nullsec is safer than Hisec but that's a much larger problem CCP has created.

There isn't enough low sec outside of FW space.


Nope. You're confusing ISK in an individual's wallet with the amount of ISK in the game.

PVP isn't an ISK sink. No money leaves the system when a ship is blown up. The individual might be out some cash if the pilot purchaced the ships, but that money goes to who the pilot bought the ships from. That's ISK movement, not a sink.

If the pilot builds her own ships, then there's a slight sink in manufacturing fees. But then, that's not PVP, that's industry.

If all the ships in the game were uninsured and exploded tomorrow, this would only cause an ISK loss in one way: Players rage-quitting EvE and taking their ISK out of circulation.

Insurance is a type of faucet because if everyone had insurance on all those ships, then that ISK from the payments would come from nowhere. However, insuance is also a sink, because if magically every ship in the game had insurance and they all survived for the length of an insurance contract, then that's money leaving the game with no return. Insurance is tricky, and honestly needs to be reviewed to make sure that the pay-ins and pay-outs cancel each other out as much as possible.

Safety has nothing to do with the amount of ISK circulating in the game. It might decide how much it moves between players, but that has nothing to with how much ISK is generated or is destroyed as a whole.


As for why this thread was looking for sink ideas. We are about to lose a sink in the form of med-clone costs. While the loss of this sink obviously hasn't affected the game's economy yet, and we don't know for sure how it will affect the economy in the future, it would be better to have something to replace the sink should we need it.

I'll say again, that it's better to have a solution to a problem ready before the problem becomes a problem. Since this is all speculation, it doesn't cost the devs anything but some idle chat over beers and some note taking. Should a problem with inflation become apparent, then the devs can brush off the sink ideas and implement it. Better to be vigilant.

--Gadget

Work smarter, not harder. --Scrooge McDuck, an eminent old-Earth economist

Given an hour to save New Eden, how would respected scientist, Albertus Eisenstein compose his thoughts? "Fifty-five minutes to define the problem; save the galaxy in five."

King Fu Hostile
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#109 - 2014-11-24 23:02:28 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:
King Fu Hostile wrote:
Anthar Thebess wrote:

Goal is to create new way to pull this isk from the system in a some way - and not only assume that the best way to remove isk from game is to wait for someone to abandon his accounts.


But still the question remains- why? Why do you think the economy needs a new ISK sink?


When i started to play eve fitted Battleship was around 70mil , full fit and rigs included.
Now the same battleship cost around 250mil.

Yes there was changes to industry , extra materials etc , but when you take this into account cost change should be around 10-15%.

Yes im aware that drone regions where nerfed and most of minerals came from them, reprocessing changed ... still.
Prices are constantly increasing , and the only way for something to get really cheaper is making some stuff worthless by some CCP re balance.

Every month you cannot buy the same stuff for 1b you managed in previous month.
To what this will lead :
Check this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation

Btw.
I have some stamps from this period.
0.10 base value and new value in black stamp on top of it.
Guess the new value ....... 4.000.000

Something like here :
http://zapatopi.net/blog/?post=200807307920.stamp_nook_hyperinflation

Yes this is a game, game that wants to be REAL .



Look at prices for common items for the past year and you'll see that they haven't gone up. Some have come down. If your inflation theory was true, you'd see an upward curve for every item.

Like you said, price increases for battleships are a result of game changes, not inflation.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#110 - 2014-11-24 23:08:14 UTC
Gadget Helmsdottir wrote:
PVP isn't an ISK sink. No money leaves the system when a ship is blown up.


Destroyed modules need repurchased. Module repairs need effected. Ammunition is expended. Drones are lost.
Gadget Helmsdottir
Gadget's Workshop
#111 - 2014-11-25 00:07:10 UTC
afkalt wrote:
Gadget Helmsdottir wrote:
PVP isn't an ISK sink. No money leaves the system when a ship is blown up.


Destroyed modules need repurchased. Module repairs need effected. Ammunition is expended. Drones are lost.


Modules, ammunition, and drones are all either found via loot. -- no ISK generated or lost to the system, or are manufactered -- slight sink for manufacturing fees. There are also fees for market transactions. Once again, this is not PVP. This is Industry and trade. The PVP pilot, if she just buys all the stuff, only pays a sink in trade fees. If she's using the stuff she found via looting the enemy, then she's contributed no ISK loss or gain to circulation. Her personal finances may go up and down, but the ISK in the system remained constant.

PVP can lead to more industry and trade, and these lead to ISK sinks in manufacturing and trade fees. So while PVP doesn't actually generate or produce ISK into circulation, it can be a catalyst for other activities to do so.

I can't really think of any fair way of taxing the PVPer specifically, let alone even want to try. Actually... scratch that. I guess war decs would count as a PVP-centric sink.

--Gadget

Work smarter, not harder. --Scrooge McDuck, an eminent old-Earth economist

Given an hour to save New Eden, how would respected scientist, Albertus Eisenstein compose his thoughts? "Fifty-five minutes to define the problem; save the galaxy in five."

Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#112 - 2014-11-25 00:13:01 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:
King Fu Hostile wrote:
Anthar Thebess wrote:

Goal is to create new way to pull this isk from the system in a some way - and not only assume that the best way to remove isk from game is to wait for someone to abandon his accounts.


But still the question remains- why? Why do you think the economy needs a new ISK sink?


When i started to play eve fitted Battleship was around 70mil , full fit and rigs included.
Now the same battleship cost around 250mil.

Yes there was changes to industry , extra materials etc , but when you take this into account cost change should be around 10-15%.




the amount of minerals went up by more than 10% it was equalized to the teir 3's
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#113 - 2014-11-25 00:15:37 UTC
Gadget Helmsdottir wrote:
afkalt wrote:
Gadget Helmsdottir wrote:
PVP isn't an ISK sink. No money leaves the system when a ship is blown up.


Destroyed modules need repurchased. Module repairs need effected. Ammunition is expended. Drones are lost.


Modules, ammunition, and drones are all either found via loot. -- no ISK generated or lost to the system, or are manufactered -- slight sink for manufacturing fees. There are also fees for market transactions. Once again, this is not PVP. This is Industry and trade. The PVP pilot, if she just buys all the stuff, only pays a sink in trade fees. If she's using the stuff she found via looting the enemy, then she's contributed no ISK loss or gain to circulation. Her personal finances may go up and down, but the ISK in the system remained constant.

PVP can lead to more industry and trade, and these lead to ISK sinks in manufacturing and trade fees. So while PVP doesn't actually generate or produce ISK into circulation, it can be a catalyst for other activities to do so.

I can't really think of any fair way of taxing the PVPer specifically, let alone even want to try. Actually... scratch that. I guess war decs would count as a PVP-centric sink.

--Gadget


Just a quick note that industry and trade are equally PvP as you are directly competing with other players, you may not be shooting them but can cost them isk just as effectively...
Gadget Helmsdottir
Gadget's Workshop
#114 - 2014-11-25 00:25:25 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
[
Just a quick note that industry and trade are equally PvP as you are directly competing with other players, you may not be shooting them but can cost them isk just as effectively...


That's a given. I was refering to PVP in it's more focused meaning. Blowing each other up. :)

--Gadget

Work smarter, not harder. --Scrooge McDuck, an eminent old-Earth economist

Given an hour to save New Eden, how would respected scientist, Albertus Eisenstein compose his thoughts? "Fifty-five minutes to define the problem; save the galaxy in five."

Basil Pupkin
Republic Military School
#115 - 2014-11-25 06:17:54 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:

-5% bounty is not much , and most of the ratters do rate in blue donut , so they get a bit more.
Reprocessing change , sorry this have nothing to do with isk.
When you reprocess stuff you don't get additional isk, just minerals.
You have to difference assets and isk.

So you propose to screw everyone not ratting in the blue donut?

Anthar Thebess wrote:
Look at this this way.

You killed 100 bs rats, and you got 100mil isk from bounty and 100mil worth materials from reprocessing , and salvage.

From those minerals you build yourself 3 battlecruisers, using those 100mil you bought fits.
Day later you loose those ships in the fight.

What happened to initial assets :
1. Minerals and salvage
They where removed from the system , the moment those ship died.
You or someone else can "recover" some of the salvage by salvaging those 3 wrecks, but this will be minimal amount of goods.
2.ISK from bounty.
Isk was spent on fits, and ammunition, it was not destroyed with those ships, it just changed hands.
What more , loosing those ships generated isk from insurance , so you got around 40-50mil to your wallet.

Summarizing :
From 100mil isk introduced into the system, and 100mil worth of minerals we got to the point that we have 140-150mil isk in the system and 0 isk in goods.

Insurance is important for new players.
Goal is to create new way to pull this isk from the system in a some way - and not only assume that the best way to remove isk from game is to wait for someone to abandon his accounts.




Didn't you just said that assets have nothing to do with ISK, and then instantly converted them to ISK there?
I don't like your math. Somewhere in the middle fits disappeared and bounty appeared out of nowhere. And it somehow added 100m to the flow.
Not to mention that insurance is already not covering much on most current pvp doctrines - T2 and T3 hulls - producing those takes a lot more than just minerals, and good ratting ships costs even more than those.

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.

Mina Sebiestar
Minmatar Inner Space Conglomerate
#116 - 2014-11-25 06:30:50 UTC
Tax on local chat you want intel pay concord...

A lot hi lo or blue sec regardless.

*cough il take my leave now

You choke behind a smile a fake behind the fear

Because >>I is too hard

Anthar Thebess
#117 - 2014-11-25 07:56:46 UTC
I stated that assets are not isk.
This was just used as an example.
1.Obtained minerals where used to build ships.
2.Those minerals where used to build ships , and with those ships they where removed from system.
3.Loosing those ships generated insurance ISK. ( this is good for new players)

Example was about that isk obtained at the same time as materials, don't die with the ships, just change hands.

Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#118 - 2014-11-25 08:00:23 UTC
Affordable faction modules. Most of them are barely better than tech 2 yet barely cheaper than deadspace so everyone just fits deadspace instead. If faction modules were more affordable (considering overall price) while a good chunk of their market value was the ISK cost from the LP store, they would get used a lot more and that would mean large amounts of ISK being drained into LP stores.

Giving LP stores more options for things you can buy with mostly just ISK would really help put a cap on inflation because inflation would cause those particular items to become cheaper, increasing their popularity, causing ISK to go to LP stores, causing deflation.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Anthar Thebess
#119 - 2014-11-25 08:14:14 UTC
Faction modules from LP stores are good isk sinks.
If they are worthless - they are quite cheap, on the opposite if they are kind of "OP" then their price goes to dozens or hundred of millions.

Why Republic Fleet Points are so expensive?
Because when you mount it on ship that will apply bonuses , and use this "overload" button. You get something very interesting ;)

Expanding LP stores can be good, but at thing same time we will create big pressure on T2 market.

Now why LP store items are good to eve :
Republic Fleet Warp Scrambler

What do you need to get one from NPC:
LP : 80,000
ISK: 32,000,000
& tags.

So each time this kind module is bought 32milion isk is being removed from the game.


Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#120 - 2014-11-25 08:24:01 UTC
They should cut back on those LP costs, especially for faction modules where the only difference between them and tech 2 is CPU cost.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."