These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Dev blog: Skill trading in New Eden

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1481 - 2016-01-27 20:05:05 UTC
ViolentDesire wrote:
I'm talking about this specific change. How often have they implemented it?
That's not what you asked, nor relevant to the fact that CCP doesn't do votes on changes. That it's this change doesn't make it somehow super special everyone gets treated like an internal decision maker time.
Yaasmine
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1482 - 2016-01-27 20:06:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Yaasmine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZXowkNfyN8

14:52

Biggest Positive
More people doing more things IN SPACE


aka
NOT playing skill que online. and not docked because playing skill que online





so WHAT do you want from EVE

do you want more people playing the game? -aka what CCP is trying to do. (its MMO for a reason. game devs try to catch new players up to older to balance out the playing field. like how GW2 lowered the exp cost to level. or WoW made past expansions free for subscribers. or how SWTOR made leveling more streamlined. or WoT released tier 8 prem tanks)

or do you want more people playign skill que online. stayign docked. and not interacting with the game. (aka game right now)
ViolentDesire
78934223
#1483 - 2016-01-27 20:08:13 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
ViolentDesire wrote:
I'm talking about this specific change. How often have they implemented it?
That's not what you asked, nor relevant to the fact that CCP doesn't do votes on changes. That it's this change doesn't make it somehow super special everyone gets treated like an internal decision maker time.


That is what I'm asking. If you think not, you are not interpreting correctly.
sero Hita
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1484 - 2016-01-27 20:16:50 UTC
ViolentDesire wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

ViolentDesire wrote:
Send an eve mail to every likely unique account and let them vote. But they dont want to know or discuss. They want the money.
Since when do they do this? Ever? And if such votes are so important, why do you play a game where they never have them? Also people need to learn that feedback != a vote.


How often do they monetize the skill point system?


I don't understand why they would need to hear your opinion about how they want to earn their money? what company would let their customers vote about if they can implement a certain way to earn money? Has your bank ever let you vote, before they change how they earn money (introducing extra charges on credit cards etc)? No, they do not. I don't understand why computer game companies has to have another code of business honor, than other companies?

"I'm all for pvp, don't get me wrong. I've ganked in Empire, blobed in low sec. Got T-shirts from every which-where.. But to be forced into a pvp confrontation that I didn't want is wrong ccp." RealFlisker
ViolentDesire
78934223
#1485 - 2016-01-27 20:23:11 UTC
sero Hita wrote:
ViolentDesire wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

ViolentDesire wrote:
Send an eve mail to every likely unique account and let them vote. But they dont want to know or discuss. They want the money.
Since when do they do this? Ever? And if such votes are so important, why do you play a game where they never have them? Also people need to learn that feedback != a vote.


How often do they monetize the skill point system?


I don't understand why they would need to hear your opinion about how they want to earn their money? what company would let their customers vote about if they can implement a certain way to earn money? Has your bank ever let you vote, before they change how they earn money (introducing extra charges on credit cards etc)? No, they do not. I don't understand why computer game companies has to have another code of business honor, than other companies?


Memphis Baas wrote:
Quite a few posts in this thread are pro- this change, and I'm guessing Reddit and the internet at large aren't quite as against this as you. So why do you assume they aren't listening to player feedback? In addition, forums have about 1000 posters; the only way to reach the 30,000+ in-game is to implement this feature and see what they do.


The issue was if they wanted to know. They dont. If they did, they could find out. This is in line with refusing to discuss in the 300 page thread.
Oreb Wing
Last Rites.
#1486 - 2016-01-27 20:48:18 UTC
Tristan Agion wrote:
Oreb Wing wrote:

You make them too expensive and CCP will have gained nothing, hardly helped any new player and have nothing but the heaped on ridicule of being greedy stuck on every wall.

On the flip side, if they price them too low, or ' affordable', as you put it, you will see exactly what CSM Mike, and others, have said. Except he went furthest. The rich will pull them off market with the highest buy orders and use them strategically in-game to buff their alt capital numbers, as it would be much cheaper to make sure no one can oppose you than offer SRP. Then noobs will rely on friends to fill up their purchased extractors because even the bazaar became a wasteland.

They need to not be 'affordable'. The price point you suggest for a full extractor should be what an empty one should come near to being.

This makes no sense whatsoever, even on its own questionable terms. "Affordable" is not some kind of absolute number, it is relative to the person and their financial situation. The ISK rich will do what you suggest whether the filled injectors costs 300M, 500M, 1B or even more ISK, as long as they see some value in such an investment. They can afford it, and they will if it furthers their agenda. You cannot price them out of the market, at least not with a remotely sane price for the extractor.

But you can price "newbies" out of the market, or for that matter mid-level players, or indeed anybody who is neither member of a corp owning an ISK faucet nor embracing grinding as their way of life. If you raise the price too high, make it "not affordable" for most, then the only action you will see is precisely the 1% of EVE recruiting an alt army, or the like. Not only is that a really dumb move concerning overall game play and balance, it isn't even financially attractive. The 1% are that, the 1%. And maybe they buy a good many alts each, but once they are done with that, they will be done with that. There is no steady cash flow in this.

The only thing that makes sense here is to make these extractors affordable. Of course, what the filled injectors will cost is a function of the market. But CCP can manipulate the minimum cost at least, and really should keep it low to see lots of trade and usage of these.

Finally, the idea that the ISK rich of EVE can somehow "suck dry" the SP market is just plain silly. Of course, they can buy out all SP injectors that come to market initially. But if they do this, then the prices for the injectors will be very high on the market (demand outstripping supply). It takes about 2.5 months to set up a SP farm from scratch (the time it takes to get a new character from their initial 400k to 5.5M, ready for extraction). If the prices remain high for a few weeks, lots of people will start building up SP farms. So within about 3 months you will see this first big wave of farmed SP supply hit the market. If the ISK rich insists on buying this SP as fast as it arrives, then you can bet that people will expand their SP farms, and ever more people will continuously try to get in on this enormous ISK flow.

Eventually the ever rising supply will overwhelm the demand, eventually the ISK rich will go broke if they continue buying. It's just not possible to buy up a supply that is not only renewable, but renewable at essentially arbitrary speeds (you can always add more alts to a SP farm). At that point the market would crash, and we would be swimming in an incredible oversupply of injectors, probably being sold off way below cost...



By the end here, you just proved me right. If you cannot see how low cost injectors can artificially inflate PLEX in the short term, then actually DEVALUATE plex in the long run, then I daresay you have not seen as far ahead as I have.

All our would take is a handful of nerds that think it's fun to make a game out of selling the SP they accumulated. They could destroy Eve without ever firing a single missile. Industrialists that never leave station need only plug the best learning implants and sell the injectors as an easy side project. Now add the 1% over and on top of that.
Suede
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1487 - 2016-01-27 20:49:43 UTC
Scott Dracov wrote:
CCP Games posts Dev Blog: Exploring The Character Bazaar & Skill Trading 15th October 2015 to see the reaction to selling skill points. the result was overwhelmingly negative responses to the idea...

5 days later...

CCP Games Selects Aria Systems’ Active Monetization Platform to monetize EVE and EVE Valkyrie with micro transactions of all activities in EVE– 20th October 2015...

I suspect...

Aria salesman whispered sweet nothings in the new boss at CCP's ear... the guy who borrowed 30 mil from his dad and spent it on CCP to gain control of EVE and is now mesmerized by micro transacting EVE to death to "Improve" EVE. LOL.

It is my pleasure to tell you... new CCP head dude that you got scammed by Aria hardcore... the Jita bears are laughing at you. They will all perish as EVE goes down in flames but so will your "reign" over it when the fruits of your betrayal come home to bite you in the ass.

http://crossingzebras.com/is-valkyrie-monetization-coming-to-eve-online/
"The news broke in October (2015) that CCP had selected Aria Systems’ active monetization platform for Valkyrie, launching in 2016.

The Icelandic video game producer (CCP), best known for producing EVE Online and its pioneering virtual reality games, performed a comprehensive review of cloud-based billing solutions before choosing to adopt the Aria platform to monetize their entire portfolio of games (EVE online is CCP's only successful game they have no real portfolio.). The first game (besides EVE) to use Aria’s monetization platform will be EVE: Valkyrie, when it is launched in 2016."

a recent history of CCP games...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CCP_Games

In October 2011, following a large controversy over its introduction of micro transactions to the game EVE Online, CCP announced that it would be reducing its staff. As stated in a CCP press release, the layoffs affected about 20% of all world wide jobs within CCP, most in their Atlanta, GA office. These layoffs were mainly of staff related to the development of World of Darkness.

On 28 August 2014, CCP shutdown their San Francisco studio to refocus their efforts on EVE Online. At the same time of the announcement, the CFO, Joe Gallo and CMO, David Reid quit. As of 2015, none of CCP's original founders are still with the company.


The short shortsightedness of this view of EVE... CCP no longer sees EVE as some treasure that will reap steady rewards for decades through honest and simple subscription fees... but a pinata that must be busted open and smashed to get at all the valuable prizes inside... all that money from all those players who invested in EVE that believed their investment would be honored have been betrayed categorically in every way.

More and more it seems all CCP has been doing for a very long time is putting all their efforts into turning EVE into a pay to win micro transacted nightmare.

If they spent half the effort and money they did on actually improving EVE that they did on this Aria scam EVE would be a lot better off.

but these new guys bought EVE out and have control of CCP so they can destroy EVE and no one is going to stop them.

Your going to need to monetize undocking, chat channels and buying plex with isk CCP because there is a good chance most of your player base will not be paying you any real cash ever again.

I suspect they will buy plex with isk as I will to keep playing short term so better ladder plex up to 10bil+ to stop them... from playing EVE... because they refuse to pay you ever again because you want to scam them with rage pinging their credit card at 1-10bucks at a time after they prepaid you months in advance with subscription fees.

because you suck and have no interest in a player paying you for the next twenty years with subscription fees and need to get your micro rocks off with aria because you paid aria to get your micro rocks off and want to so bad your about to explode...

cheers...

and f%*# you CCP.



other good read

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jun/05/world-of-darkness-the-inside-story-mmo-ccp-white-wolf


Microtransactions and 'monocle-gate'


The development difficulties were only part of the Incarna problem. According to sources, CCP management had decided to introduce microtransactions, unbeknownst to most of the rank and file, charging real money for cosmetic items with which to customise character avatars. This is a familiar feature in online games, but usually a new outfit for a player character will cost $15-20. CCP decided to charge much more. The most notorious example was a monocle costing $70. The price tag infuriated fans kick-starting a major pricing controversy that would go on to become known as Monocle-gate.


The CEO had members of the fiction writing team put the apology together - he was either so out of touch, so arrogant, that he couldn’t find the words himself

The management response was elusive. In June 2011, senior producer Arnar Gylfason delivered an ambiguous statement, comparing the pixelated monocles to $1000 jeans and questioning whether people should buy clothes in real life at all. Eve subscriptions declined sharply and precipitously, and there were actual in-game riots in protest.


Eventually CEO Hilmar Veigar Pétursson issued an apology to the players. But even this short appeasement wasn’t what it seemed; according to Blood, Petursson didn’t actually write it.

“He had members of our storyline team – a group responsible for writing in-game content and fiction – put it together,” he says. “He was either so out of touch, so arrogant, or perhaps both, that he couldn’t find the words to say himself. They bailed him out big time.”
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1488 - 2016-01-27 20:49:44 UTC
ViolentDesire wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
ViolentDesire wrote:
I'm talking about this specific change. How often have they implemented it?
That's not what you asked, nor relevant to the fact that CCP doesn't do votes on changes. That it's this change doesn't make it somehow super special everyone gets treated like an internal decision maker time.


That is what I'm asking. If you think not, you are not interpreting correctly.
I'm only reading what was written, a clear accusation of ccp not wanting feedback despite requesting it because they didn't put it to a vote, which they never do. You're clearly stating "they don't want to know or discuss" by stating, erroneously, that a vote is the only means of providing feedback.
Yaasmine
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1489 - 2016-01-27 20:50:09 UTC
Oreb Wing wrote:
Tristan Agion wrote:
Oreb Wing wrote:

You make them too expensive and CCP will have gained nothing, hardly helped any new player and have nothing but the heaped on ridicule of being greedy stuck on every wall.

On the flip side, if they price them too low, or ' affordable', as you put it, you will see exactly what CSM Mike, and others, have said. Except he went furthest. The rich will pull them off market with the highest buy orders and use them strategically in-game to buff their alt capital numbers, as it would be much cheaper to make sure no one can oppose you than offer SRP. Then noobs will rely on friends to fill up their purchased extractors because even the bazaar became a wasteland.

They need to not be 'affordable'. The price point you suggest for a full extractor should be what an empty one should come near to being.

This makes no sense whatsoever, even on its own questionable terms. "Affordable" is not some kind of absolute number, it is relative to the person and their financial situation. The ISK rich will do what you suggest whether the filled injectors costs 300M, 500M, 1B or even more ISK, as long as they see some value in such an investment. They can afford it, and they will if it furthers their agenda. You cannot price them out of the market, at least not with a remotely sane price for the extractor.

But you can price "newbies" out of the market, or for that matter mid-level players, or indeed anybody who is neither member of a corp owning an ISK faucet nor embracing grinding as their way of life. If you raise the price too high, make it "not affordable" for most, then the only action you will see is precisely the 1% of EVE recruiting an alt army, or the like. Not only is that a really dumb move concerning overall game play and balance, it isn't even financially attractive. The 1% are that, the 1%. And maybe they buy a good many alts each, but once they are done with that, they will be done with that. There is no steady cash flow in this.

The only thing that makes sense here is to make these extractors affordable. Of course, what the filled injectors will cost is a function of the market. But CCP can manipulate the minimum cost at least, and really should keep it low to see lots of trade and usage of these.

Finally, the idea that the ISK rich of EVE can somehow "suck dry" the SP market is just plain silly. Of course, they can buy out all SP injectors that come to market initially. But if they do this, then the prices for the injectors will be very high on the market (demand outstripping supply). It takes about 2.5 months to set up a SP farm from scratch (the time it takes to get a new character from their initial 400k to 5.5M, ready for extraction). If the prices remain high for a few weeks, lots of people will start building up SP farms. So within about 3 months you will see this first big wave of farmed SP supply hit the market. If the ISK rich insists on buying this SP as fast as it arrives, then you can bet that people will expand their SP farms, and ever more people will continuously try to get in on this enormous ISK flow.

Eventually the ever rising supply will overwhelm the demand, eventually the ISK rich will go broke if they continue buying. It's just not possible to buy up a supply that is not only renewable, but renewable at essentially arbitrary speeds (you can always add more alts to a SP farm). At that point the market would crash, and we would be swimming in an incredible oversupply of injectors, probably being sold off way below cost...



By the end here, you just proved me right. If you cannot see how low cost injectors can artificially inflate PLEX in the short term, then actually DEVALUATE plex in the long run, then I daresay you have not seen as far ahead as I have.

All our would take is a handful of nerds that think it's fun to make a game out of selling the SP they accumulated. They could destroy Eve without ever firing a single missile. Industrialists that never leave station need only plug the best learning implants and sell the injectors as an easy side project. Now add the 1% over and on top of that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZXowkNfyN8

14:52

so WHAT do you want from EVE

do you want more people playing the game? -aka what CCP is trying to do.

or do you want more people playign skill que online. stayign docked. and not interacting with the game. (aka game right now)
sero Hita
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1490 - 2016-01-27 20:53:26 UTC
ViolentDesire wrote:

The issue was if they wanted to know. They dont. If they did, they could find out. This is in line with refusing to discuss in the 300 page thread.

Well, not really. It would be hard to know what people really want from that vote. Most likely only the ones strongly for or against would vote. The ones who don't care and will not leave the game if it is implemented, would most likely not vote. As the ones that don't care counts in CCPs favor regarding implementing SP trading (As they are not against and would not leave), you would bias the survey. By omitting the ones who don't care if it is implemented, the people against it would end up as overrepresentated. It would be %con vs. %pro, instead of the more relevant %con vs. %pro + %neutral. I understand why you woul want that as it is biased in your favour, but scientific it is not.

This is of course without considering how ridiculous it would be to get everyone to vote for something this small.

"I'm all for pvp, don't get me wrong. I've ganked in Empire, blobed in low sec. Got T-shirts from every which-where.. But to be forced into a pvp confrontation that I didn't want is wrong ccp." RealFlisker
Yaasmine
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1491 - 2016-01-27 20:55:13 UTC
sero Hita wrote:
ViolentDesire wrote:

The issue was if they wanted to know. They dont. If they did, they could find out. This is in line with refusing to discuss in the 300 page thread.

Well, not really. It would be hard to know what people really want from that vote. Most likely only the ones strongly for or against would vote. The ones who don't care and will not leave the game if it is implemented, would most likely not vote. As the ones that don't care counts in CCPs favor regarding implementing SP trading (As they are not against and would not leave), you would bias the survey. By omitting the ones who don't care if it is implemented, the people against it would end up as overrepresentated. It would be %con vs. %pro, instead of the more relevant %con vs. %pro + %neutral. I understand why you woul want that as it is biased in your favour, but scientific it is not.

This is of course without considering how ridiculous it would be to get everyone to vote for something this small.

and including how many people have alts that would use the alts to gain more votes for their opinion
sero Hita
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1492 - 2016-01-27 20:57:58 UTC
Suede wrote:
monocle gate

this is completely different though. As that was gold ammo, classical pay2win, and this is not. And it will not matter how many times you post this misconception, because the sp trading is coming regardless if you want it or not.

"I'm all for pvp, don't get me wrong. I've ganked in Empire, blobed in low sec. Got T-shirts from every which-where.. But to be forced into a pvp confrontation that I didn't want is wrong ccp." RealFlisker
ViolentDesire
78934223
#1493 - 2016-01-27 21:01:34 UTC
sero Hita wrote:
ViolentDesire wrote:

The issue was if they wanted to know. They dont. If they did, they could find out. This is in line with refusing to discuss in the 300 page thread.

Well, not really. It would be hard to know what people really want from that vote.

No. "Do you want SP trading as currently proposed?" "Yes"/"No". That would give a clear answer.
Quote:
This is of course without considering how ridiculous it would be to get everyone to vote for something this small.

A 300 page thread, albeit with a fair amount of trolling, is not small.
sero Hita
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1494 - 2016-01-27 21:04:31 UTC  |  Edited by: sero Hita
ViolentDesire wrote:

No. "Do you want SP trading as currently proposed?" "Yes"/"No". That would give a clear answer.

did you read my post at all? Because I explained in simple words, why that would be biased and not give you the answer you want.

"I'm all for pvp, don't get me wrong. I've ganked in Empire, blobed in low sec. Got T-shirts from every which-where.. But to be forced into a pvp confrontation that I didn't want is wrong ccp." RealFlisker
ViolentDesire
78934223
#1495 - 2016-01-27 21:05:14 UTC
Yaasmine wrote:
sero Hita wrote:
ViolentDesire wrote:

The issue was if they wanted to know. They dont. If they did, they could find out. This is in line with refusing to discuss in the 300 page thread.

Well, not really. It would be hard to know what people really want from that vote. Most likely only the ones strongly for or against would vote. The ones who don't care and will not leave the game if it is implemented, would most likely not vote. As the ones that don't care counts in CCPs favor regarding implementing SP trading (As they are not against and would not leave), you would bias the survey. By omitting the ones who don't care if it is implemented, the people against it would end up as overrepresentated. It would be %con vs. %pro, instead of the more relevant %con vs. %pro + %neutral. I understand why you woul want that as it is biased in your favour, but scientific it is not.

This is of course without considering how ridiculous it would be to get everyone to vote for something this small.

and including how many people have alts that would use the alts to gain more votes for their opinion


That would be irrelevant given that reddit is used to argue this being supported. But if that was a concern, CCP could likely filter out a significant number of alts.
Yaasmine
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1496 - 2016-01-27 21:06:28 UTC
ViolentDesire wrote:
sero Hita wrote:
ViolentDesire wrote:

The issue was if they wanted to know. They dont. If they did, they could find out. This is in line with refusing to discuss in the 300 page thread.

Well, not really. It would be hard to know what people really want from that vote.

No. "Do you want SP trading as currently proposed?" "Yes"/"No". That would give a clear answer.
Quote:
This is of course without considering how ridiculous it would be to get everyone to vote for something this small.

A 300 page thread, albeit with a fair amount of trolling, is not small.

300 page thread, where the negative nancies can spam posts to make themselves seem like theres more of them.

so....no

reddit's vote which shows how many upvote to downvote, regardless of how many times 1 person spams. is better.
sero Hita
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1497 - 2016-01-27 21:08:31 UTC  |  Edited by: sero Hita
ViolentDesire wrote:


That would be irrelevant given that reddit is used to argue this being supported. But if that was a concern, CCP could likely filter out a significant number of alts.


yes, but the silent minority who would not care or be against, would not vote. They would count as pro SP trading (they are not against), from CCPs point of view. If they did the vote like you say, they fix their own survey against themselves. Who would do that?

"I'm all for pvp, don't get me wrong. I've ganked in Empire, blobed in low sec. Got T-shirts from every which-where.. But to be forced into a pvp confrontation that I didn't want is wrong ccp." RealFlisker
ViolentDesire
78934223
#1498 - 2016-01-27 21:10:39 UTC
sero Hita wrote:
ViolentDesire wrote:

No. "Do you want SP trading as currently proposed?" "Yes"/"No". That would give a clear answer.

did you read my post at all? Because I explained in simple words, why that would be biased and not give you the answer you want.


Disagree. But even if it did, it would be better than what we have now. So it comes back not wanting to know. Probably because they do "know".
Yaasmine
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1499 - 2016-01-27 21:11:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Yaasmine
ViolentDesire wrote:
Yaasmine wrote:
sero Hita wrote:
ViolentDesire wrote:

The issue was if they wanted to know. They dont. If they did, they could find out. This is in line with refusing to discuss in the 300 page thread.

Well, not really. It would be hard to know what people really want from that vote. Most likely only the ones strongly for or against would vote. The ones who don't care and will not leave the game if it is implemented, would most likely not vote. As the ones that don't care counts in CCPs favor regarding implementing SP trading (As they are not against and would not leave), you would bias the survey. By omitting the ones who don't care if it is implemented, the people against it would end up as overrepresentated. It would be %con vs. %pro, instead of the more relevant %con vs. %pro + %neutral. I understand why you woul want that as it is biased in your favour, but scientific it is not.

This is of course without considering how ridiculous it would be to get everyone to vote for something this small.

and including how many people have alts that would use the alts to gain more votes for their opinion


That would be irrelevant given that reddit is used to argue this being supported. But if that was a concern, CCP could likely filter out a significant number of alts.


or. CCP could look at Reddit, see how many more upvoted than downvoted.

they could compare these numbers to facebook, how many likes it recieved.

they could then look at announcement videos that explain it from multiple points of view
like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZXowkNfyN8
and compare the upvotes to downvotes.


and see if the data matches out on all.



which they do.

88%-92% upvotes on reddit
with a similar number of likes on facebook (to the total number of votes in reddit)
and 92% likes on this video (and similar videos)



the result? across the board it seems like a similar number (92%) are in support. while a similar number (8-12%) are not.





now if reddit had 40% upvote. and youtube had 92%. then that would show there is some conflict.


but as it is. right now, 92% is the common number they seem to be sharing.


so, the majority votes. for skill injectors.
and the 8% can be as vocal as they want. but in the end. they still 8%. even if they post 10x as often as a person who supports.


there are college level classes for polling methods. you should try one. its an interesting course. and worth 3 credits.
they teach how to spread a query across a large area to find a common theme (in this case. 92%)

so instead of putting it in 1 place(IE in game), they can get the feeling from people who are considerign playing as well. and people who may be inactive (cause skill que online only needs you to log in once a month)
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1500 - 2016-01-27 21:15:05 UTC
Oreb Wing wrote:
By the end here, you just proved me right. If you cannot see how low cost injectors can artificially inflate PLEX in the short term, then actually DEVALUATE plex in the long run, then I daresay you have not seen as far ahead as I have.

All our would take is a handful of nerds that think it's fun to make a game out of selling the SP they accumulated. They could destroy Eve without ever firing a single missile. Industrialists that never leave station need only plug the best learning implants and sell the injectors as an easy side project. Now add the 1% over and on top of that.
None of you conclusions are prevented by a high extractor price point. It just increases the cost of the initial extractor. If the SP sells for more than the price of the extractor those undocking industrialist farming SP with +5's won't care is extractors cost 100AUR, 1,000 or 10,000. That's an inevitability, and a non-destructive one. Having SP be accessible can't and won't kill Eve.

Long term devaluation of PLEX is actually positive for everyone but those buying from CCP as well. There's really no gain from a high extractor point save for CCP getting more money per unit.