Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Adunh Slavy
754
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 00:14:00 -
[31] - Quote
Kara Books wrote:Regulation
Regulation is a bad word. Perhaps instead of regulation, there is consequence. If you're in default, you (individual, corp, alliance, whatever) goes suspect for 30 days.
Market forces, and being blown up by anyone in the game, should provide all the regulation that is needed. |
Adunh Slavy
754
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 00:19:00 -
[32] - Quote
Caleb Ayrania wrote:That is basically a very precise def of what type of corporate entity would need to be established by the players. This would be something similar to a real life rating company, audit business and consulting. The difference would be in EVE such a group would also need a strong arm a repo and enforcer activity. A bit like a Deloitte with a Merc corp or strong affiliations to these.
Why so complicated? If CCP created some kind of financial instrument, we could buy and sell on the market, then what we need as players is some kind of historical record on what this entity (player, corp, alliance) has done with their past finical instruments.
If they're in default, suspect flag them, the entire game becomes the "merc force". Simple.
This still leaves plenty of room for player run audits and rating agency like activities with out all the burdensome overhead. |
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec
141
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 01:36:00 -
[33] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:Caleb Ayrania wrote:That is basically a very precise def of what type of corporate entity would need to be established by the players. This would be something similar to a real life rating company, audit business and consulting. The difference would be in EVE such a group would also need a strong arm a repo and enforcer activity. A bit like a Deloitte with a Merc corp or strong affiliations to these. Why so complicated? If CCP created some kind of financial instrument, we could buy and sell on the market, then what we need as players is some kind of historical record on what this entity (player, corp, alliance) has done with their past financial instruments. If they're in default, suspect flag them, the entire game becomes the "merc force". Simple. This still leaves plenty of room for player run audits and rating agency like activities with out all the burdensome overhead.
Scams and griefing is part of the game. This is not a consenting pvp game. It should be no different with a financial metagame aspect. No protection or game mechanics from ccp AT ALL. If we want consequences we need to deliver them, and thus we need something along the lines of what Karen talks about.
I stated very clearly earlier that we will never get anything if people alway keep bringing these endless feture creeping issues up. We only need a few EXTREMELY basic things to get started.
Player billing. (Bottom up economy, and automation for rentals and more meta services)
Unique BPO or ejectable item as shares that can go in contracts. and API calls to these contracts to track traded prices.
Last Crest injected data by players. So API/Crest can subject NAV and resulting budget data, and give estimates on shares valuation, and corporation revenues, profit and growth.
Anything else would be emerging and player created content, services and features.
Ofc we could sit here and stack feature wishes till we got blue in the face, but that has been a returning event on at least yearly basis, for 9 years.
If we ask for the minimums who knows we might get ccp to add a few ideas, they do still have some internal people with vision and knowledge. The shares system as is already ingame have been with us practically since launch, so its not that foreign an idea. The problem is how to handle potentially hundreds in not thousands of new unique items. The only way is to let it go into a contract system and let the unique ID be the basis for the system.
|
Adunh Slavy
754
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 02:39:00 -
[34] - Quote
Caleb Ayrania wrote:
Scams and griefing is part of the game. This is not a consenting pvp game. It should be no different with a financial metagame aspect. No protection or game mechanics from ccp AT ALL. If we want consequences we need to deliver them, and thus we need something along the lines of what Karen talks about.
Then it will fail as a feature. There is no trust in Eve. Setting a defalting party suspect will at least provide consequence. Some where along the line, there has to be a trigger for consequences that does not reply upon the player base, a pack of cats, trying to herd it self. |
Calebus Phobeus
Eternal Seekers of Darkness
2
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 10:04:00 -
[35] - Quote
As everyone note already, it stock and bonds are just not working as its just scamming and no garantee for them to ever see their money again. Enforcing contracts might be hard to realize. But I still like the idea of having such kind of contracts, so why not solving it more in an Eve style way? You can setup contracts that are regulating the obligations and allows to create bonds for a specific amount of time. If they're are missed, the creditor receives a permanent kill right on the debtor that is active as long as the bond including interest is not repayed.
People still will need to trust the guy who they give money to. Nobody serious would give such a contract to any of the typical Jita scammers. As debitor you have something you put into that actually does not costs much, but can make your life a pain when you're not repaying it. However you don't need any value to get such a contract. The creditor does basically have some kind of garantee and still a high risk as everyone might still just leave the game or tries to take the money and running away. If its just an alt, you have an issue... but if its someone who plays EVE seriously, you might still have the option to convience him that its better to finally pay that bill.
That might add some more flexibility into the system and some interesting settings. Of course, the debitor might still flee into null sec being out of your reach. But might also add some more extra work for head hunters to finally fetch them. Some system like this might be the foundation of a stock or bond system. And might motivate creditors and debitors to participate... even if some creditors might be just looking for exchanging some money for some kills... ;) |
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec
141
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 16:36:00 -
[36] - Quote
A lot of totally out of context topics are creeping into this thread..
A stock exchange should be like the real world. You do not get some protection from an investment in the real worl going to junk paper value. No one is forcing anyone to invest in dodgy or questionable businesses..
There would naturally develop a range from very trusted and safe, with low potential ROI and all the way to potential high ROI and even scams..
That is the nature of stocks and bonds.. ccp should not start policing any system of this nature.. The one exception might be if an npc participating stockmarket was introduced. That again is a whole different discussion.. A valid one, and def worth considering for a later upgraded expansion on the topic of shares and stock exchange.
If we were to talk about an npc participatory exchange, it would need to be all moved onto a market sever of its own, and preferable access would need to also be from outside the client. The traffic alone potentially generated would mena it would need to not potentially lag and stress ingame environment, and it might need to be on a 1 day game related data delay. So it got refreshed/updated with ingame data at downtime.
Back on the topic of the trial and testing phase concept. The needed features are simple and should remain so initially. Just like the API was introduced with a rather limited functionality and low utilized options.
Once upon a time you could pull isk from wallet directly into your hangar. If something like this was possible for shares we would basically have the first step. The unique item ID is the vital aspect, and the only really important one. Its also a very useful step for ccp in case they are thinking of making other modifications and unique player skins and whatnot an option.
Once we have this unique item and the ability to track them, we can develop ALL the other related needs ourselves. It would ofc take some time to figure out how to operate these tings, and what small added functions might be needed. Locking down other assets than just BPOs might be really useful, like secure cans which could act as collateral functions. Especially if access could be handled more like chat channels and have character ID access instead of passwords. Again these are not need to haves, but nice to haves.
Also if we could have the ability to pull out money/isk from wallet like we used to such liquid assets could also be locked down, without needing to use outside 3rd parties. However the integration with other corporations, alliances and individuals is the whole point. This would be what created the new types of gameplay.
tl:dr
Who would not have liked to invest isk in Somer or EOH if they had done an IPO to pay for development using isk? Or Pro Synergy, or PUSH and Red Frog?
All these things will become very relevant if we get a bottom up salary and labor driven economy to a much higher degree than we have now.
|
Umar Umarhabib
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 00:57:00 -
[37] - Quote
I think Bonds and Securities would be a viable market, if CCP implement some kind of Real Money Escrow system, that's connected to an In-Game bond system.
This would be different from just using Real Money to buy PLEX - since at the end of the Bond Term, it's against the EULA to convert ISK back to Real Money.
Example: if you want to issue a 10 Billion ISK bond, you have to put $350 USD into CCP Escrow (of course you pay the transaction fee).
Your $350 would be confiscated ONLY if you default on the PRINCIPLE, and not the monthly interest payment. I'm sure there a few other rules that could be implemented to make this system more complete.
Although from a CCP Profit standpoint, maybe the cost of implementing such system would far exceed the benefits.
Maybe this system can benefit CCP as well -- Because when a player use the In-Game Bond system to issue a bond, their Bond Term AND Real Money is locked in for say..........3 months, or 6 months. They have to click on an "I Agree" button to some type of contract stating their money is locked in for the term of the In-Game Bond. It can be 1 month, a few months, etc.
Then CCP can use the player's Real Money, and earn Interest for the term of the Bond. Paypal Bank might be be willing to work together, since they worked together with Blizzard on Diablo 3's Auction House. Or maybe Bank of Iceland =P |
Block Ukx
Forge Laboratories
153
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 02:03:00 -
[38] - Quote
Robus Muvila wrote:I love the idea that shares exist and are tradable assets, but are there any corps that bothered to "go public"? I love the idea of a player driven stock market but I have seen no instances or for that matter discussion of it either.
What?
I managed the only available stock exchange. http://www.bsacse.amxg4.com
Anyone considering going "public" should consider listing in the Exchange.
|
Block Ukx
Forge Laboratories
153
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 02:38:00 -
[39] - Quote
Tinu Moorhsum wrote: .... but how does CCP implement a mechanic for accountability?
A long time ago I suggested a way to implement "Investment Corporations" where assets are corporation tagged. Corporation NAV is display daily and shareholders can set rules to limit losses to a certain percentage. Shareholders can force a liquidation and set limits on corp NAV loss. Any ISK made by the corp goes to the corp wallet and can only be distributed to shareholders.
|
mechtech
Ice Liberation Army
362
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 03:14:00 -
[40] - Quote
Block Ukx wrote:Tinu Moorhsum wrote: .... but how does CCP implement a mechanic for accountability?
A long time ago I suggested a way to implement "Investment Corporations" where assets are corporation tagged. Corporation NAV is display daily and shareholders can set rules to limit losses to a certain percentage. Shareholders can force a liquidation and set limits on corp NAV loss. Any ISK made by the corp goes to the corp wallet and can only be distributed to shareholders.
That's a great idea! Why can't we have an expansion centered around this for once?
Sigh, next expansion will probably have 5 new ship classes, a few revamped ship models, and yet another sov model. |
|
Adunh Slavy
758
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 03:20:00 -
[41] - Quote
Umar Umarhabib wrote:I think Bonds and Securities would be a viable market, if CCP implement some kind of Real Money Escrow system, that's connected to an In-Game bond system.
I suspect the legal hurdles for that sort of thing are significant. |
Umar Umarhabib
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 04:07:00 -
[42] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:Umar Umarhabib wrote:I think Bonds and Securities would be a viable market, if CCP implement some kind of Real Money Escrow system, that's connected to an In-Game bond system.
I suspect the legal hurdles for that sort of thing are significant.
I don't think there would be that many legal hurdles, just need a few online contracts where people can click "I Agree".
It's kind of like Blizzard Account Balance, and Real Money Auction House.
Except in this case, the Account Balance would be used to secure the Principle of the Bond, and CCP can use it to earn interest, or do other stuff, during the term of the Bond. |
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec
142
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 17:09:00 -
[43] - Quote
Real Money collateral is not needed and def would never be supported by ccp in a million years..
Use PLEX, and player 3rd party.. Same function.
the whole point is dying with all this talk of making it "safe".. EVE is not supposed to be safe, and the sandbox is supposed to work without any intervening from ccp.
A stock exchange should NOT have anything remotely like it..
We only need the tools to let the players actually operate something like this, and see how it develops. Asking for feature creeping or ccp oversight and security is a waste of time. It will only make ccp even less interested in the concept, since the hassle would not be worth it..
So stay on functional needs and how PLAYERS can make it work..
|
Umar Umarhabib
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 17:57:00 -
[44] - Quote
Caleb Ayrania wrote:Real Money collateral is not needed and def would never be supported by ccp in a million years..
Use PLEX, and player 3rd party.. Same function.
the whole point is dying with all this talk of making it "safe".. EVE is not supposed to be safe, and the sandbox is supposed to work without any intervening from ccp.
A stock exchange should NOT have anything remotely like it..
We only need the tools to let the players actually operate something like this, and see how it develops. Asking for feature creeping or ccp oversight and security is a waste of time. It will only make ccp even less interested in the concept, since the hassle would not be worth it..
So stay on functional needs and how PLAYERS can make it work..
If the intended goal is for Eve Online to be Anarchy, then I guess you're right. |
Adunh Slavy
760
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 18:25:00 -
[45] - Quote
Caleb Ayrania wrote:
So stay on functional needs and how PLAYERS can make it work..
Yeah, let people shoot those in default. |
Umar Umarhabib
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 20:30:00 -
[46] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:Caleb Ayrania wrote:
So stay on functional needs and how PLAYERS can make it work..
Yeah, let people shoot those in default.
I guess people are missing the part where I said it's an Optional system, directly in competition with non-escrowed Bonds?
It's still a free market. It would be like Government Bonds vs. Private Bonds.
So if a Private Bond gets defaulted, players can still shoot those in default. |
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec
142
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 20:53:00 -
[47] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:Caleb Ayrania wrote:
So stay on functional needs and how PLAYERS can make it work..
Yeah, let people shoot those in default.
Exactly. We already have plenty of options like that.. Also if we could convince ccp to make a public visible standing feature we could develop proper blacklists and ways to make actual consequences for defaulters.
We do not need any npc / ccp involvement, we just need tools and features to make it possible to do it ourselves.
Plenty of partial success have already been reached, we just need a few tweaks and options to make this work. Then later ccp can do what they usually do take players ideas and successes and improve them into something more official. First we need the wild west and then we can get more civilized later.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4047
|
Posted - 2013.05.11 01:39:00 -
[48] - Quote
Caleb Ayrania wrote:Adunh Slavy wrote:Caleb Ayrania wrote:
So stay on functional needs and how PLAYERS can make it work..
Yeah, let people shoot those in default. Exactly. We already have plenty of options like that.. Also if we could convince ccp to make a public visible standing feature we could develop proper blacklists and ways to make actual consequences for defaulters. We do not need any npc / ccp involvement, we just need tools and features to make it possible to do it ourselves. Plenty of partial success have already been reached, we just need a few tweaks and options to make this work. Then later ccp can do what they usually do take players ideas and successes and improve them into something more official. First we need the wild west and then we can get more civilized later.
I'd like to remind the market enthusiasts (I consider myself one!) that having CCP invest time and resources into something with unknown and potentially very small grip on the player base is not going to happen.
Furthermore, knowing how CCP development tends to be done, they would need to open the umpteenth can of ancient worms and review code behind markets and shares management.
All of this for a feature that in the various attempts done in the past would cater to just two dozens guys that would actually do something more than just check the new feature out and then forget about it.
Just look at the various exchanges, even the most known (Block's) is basically a barren desert. Not because of lack of shares, but because of lack of players willing to trade (and then take dividends from) those shares.
I have done an exchange myself, with 5 kinds of shares (funds shares but still...). That too attracted 27 (IIRC) people, not more.
In both cases (mine and Block), trust was not really an issue (so, the biggest road block was taken care of), they still gained no traction. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
618
|
Posted - 2013.05.11 01:50:00 -
[49] - Quote
I confirm, I, asked my best friends weather they wanted a curupt government or a government that dealt candy, they all chose candy =( sowwwy |
Adunh Slavy
760
|
Posted - 2013.05.11 01:57:00 -
[50] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: ...
I'd be more concerned with new bug versus old ones. CCP's quality has gone up considerably in the past years however. Also, there is no requirement that whatever financial instrument they create, is connected to shares in anyway.
Exposure is an issue too, and the added burden on the player to deal with some extra web site. Something in the game will have a lot more exposure and be much simpler for players. |
|
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec
143
|
Posted - 2013.05.11 03:22:00 -
[51] - Quote
Geez..
There are people hammering on gates to get into Jita during Burn Jita..
The reason "no one" uses metagame market is because its only known to that mentioned handful..
There have never been an actual MD common group that could and would promote these things..
If there was an ingame aspect that other players would notice, then something like that would develop..
Problem with many of the experiments being conducted now and in the past is they are usually one man bands. Without more participation and scale its not going to attract much attention. No matter how trusted a person is the hit by bus and EVE burn out is among the biggest risks, and most serious potential clients know this..
|
Vienna Valentine
Sovereign Capital
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 21:00:00 -
[52] - Quote
Caleb Ayrania wrote: Problem with many of the experiments being conducted now and in the past is they are usually one man bands. Without more participation and scale its not going to attract much attention. No matter how trusted a person is the hit by bus and EVE burn out is among the biggest risks, and most serious potential clients know this.
Challenge accepted.
|
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec Invisible Exchequer
144
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 01:30:00 -
[53] - Quote
Vienna Valentine wrote:Caleb Ayrania wrote: Problem with many of the experiments being conducted now and in the past is they are usually one man bands. Without more participation and scale its not going to attract much attention. No matter how trusted a person is the hit by bus and EVE burn out is among the biggest risks, and most serious potential clients know this.
Challenge accepted.
Whats the challenge again?
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |