Originally by: Danny Centurai

---

Please could you explain why you think this is an issue?

This is just the same as rats having bounties and they are actually worth less than good rats in 0.0 space the only difference is you can't simply farm them as you have to get all the stuff home.

Personally I see no issue with these buy orders unless the same sleeper components are used somewhere in T3 ship construction which I don't believe they are.

---

Originally by: Spaztick

---

You are not outnumbered, you are in a target-rich environment.

---

Originally by: Feng Schui

---

CCP wants the T3 ships to not drop below a certain price (hence the NPC buy orders).. that being said, IMO, let the market forces do their damn jobs and get rid of the buy orders.

---

Originally by: Feng Schui

---

CCP wants the T3 ships to not drop below a certain price (hence the NPC buy orders).. that being said, IMO, let the market forces do their damn jobs and get rid of the buy orders.

---

Originally by: Feng Schui

---

CCP wants the T3 ships to not drop below a certain price (hence the NPC buy orders).. that being said, IMO, let the market forces do their damn jobs and get rid of the buy orders.

---

Originally by: Spaztick

---

You are not outnumbered, you are in a target-rich environment.

---

Originally by: WarlockX

---

Originally by: Feng Schui

---

CCP wants the T3 ships to not drop below a certain price (hence the NPC buy orders).. that being said, IMO, let the market forces do their damn jobs and get rid of the buy orders.

---

I don't think you understand what this thread is about.

---

Originally by: Feng Schui

---

That being said, if they're just that, trade goods, and serve no real purpose; then I wouldn't worry too much about it

---

Originally by: Caleb Ayrania

---

Not sure, but I would think they would remove the npc buy orders once the player markets pick up..

If I am not mistaken its to avoid to many market "holes" from logistics and price development issue..

I dont see them as a problem at this point, rather as mentioned, as a counter to the 1 isk buy order problem..

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

...But EVE is all about it's player-driven market.

---

Originally by: Shar Tegral

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

...But EVE is all about it's player-driven market.

---

Originally by: Block Ukx

---

That is the real issue. Has CCP changed its stand and is moving away from this principle?

---

Well... CCP has these new partners. These new partners want Eve, and subsequent MMO's, to grab a bigger share of the market. That bigger share is essentially people who need to be coddled.

Thus, welcome to Eve Online: Hypocritia

---

Originally by: Shar Tegral

---

This is primarily what I'm thinking. Well not the deeper into W-Space stuff mind you. Just that CCP has created another version of "overseer effects". Some reward to be gained as an additional lure for people to enter W-Space (as if there wasn't enough).

---

Originally by: Shar Tegral

---

This kind of thing is basically gov't subsidization. "Money from nothing" though, unlike gov't subsidization, should be avoided. As if Eve didn't have enough isk faucets.

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

Originally by: Feng Schui

---

That being said, if they're just that, trade goods, and serve no real purpose; then I wouldn't worry too much about it

---

If they serve no real purpose, why should they bloat the economy?

---

Originally by: Dextonia

---

I'm gonna try to not be rude or anything but how did you get on Csm?

Seems your either
1) Not very bright
2) Don't know the first thing about economics

I'm guessing that its number 2 and you just don't realize that it doesn't matter if people get Isk that did not exist in EvE before from bounties or market orders, the effect is the same so why should the market suddenly implode because of 4 new trade goods?

But if you have a hard believing me then just try to remember that DOCTOR Eyj= who works for Ccp has a DOCTORS degree in ECONOMICS, and theres a reason he has a job as the worlds only virtual economist.

---

Originally by: Krathos Morpheus

---

It's not an ISK faucet because it will give you no more isks than missioning or ratting (If you go for sleepers you're not printing as much isks as you could).

This could have been an isk sink (maybe it is already with less isk gain) if could attract missioners and ratters without giving them isk. Hell, even if it does give as much isks as missioning it is not an isk faucet because it is more risky and less mindless done (that without counting on the invitable losses incurred with wh). What counts here is the isks/hour and isks/risk to value an isk faucet.

Furthermore this has been in the game for years (empire factions tags npc buy orders) as bounties and you can not tell me that this has been "a threat to the player-driven market". The player-driven market relies on usefull goods. As long as an item has no use or can not be recycled to get minerals, this item is not for the player-driven market.

---

Originally by: Ged Satti

---

I'm inclined to agree that this is preferable to bounties. These are destroyable, and it depends on what the drop rates for these are like before we can evaluate how much of an isk faucet these are. I'd think people would get less isk from these than from spending the same amount of time mission running or ratting in 0.0. Especially once you add in scan times to find the sleepers to pew pew in the first place.

Also, talking about isk sinks being introduced (or lack thereof) I would think rats that have a much better success rate against players should at least count a little as an isk sink. Blown up ships and self destructing pods mean more insurance orders placed and more clones bought. It's not a new isk sink, but I'd think at least for a while until people adjust to sleeper tactics we'll be seeing increased use of the old ones.

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

Again, I agree that it's a good concept. One that has been requested time and time again by not just myself. However it shouldn't have been implemented in wormholes, but level 4 missions.

You also have to consider the fact that insurance is an ISK faucet.

---

Originally by: glas mir

---

Kazz what do you mean by player created items? you mean removing tech 1 drops which can be player made?

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

I think that sleepers and wormholes target an entirely different audience. People who do level 4's will keep doing those. The rest will do wormholes. While there might be a sleep overlap of people, the total audience of people now doing PvE. While the net increase in ISK per hour is lower doing sleepers, it's about the total sum of both activities together.

---

Quote:

---

1. The time barrier to entry is high

---

Quote:

---

2. The player base participating is going to be low

---

Quote:

---

3. The potential loss rate is high even with insurance since these rats are not your standard warp to encounter, aggro, launch drones, go make sandwich LOLishtar fare.

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

I question that.
20 minutes with a probe and you will find a wormhole if you are any good.

---

Originally by: Anonymously Toasting

---

This to me seems like an improvement to the bounty system (as has been stated many times over). As well as mentioned, I dont see all these new "pve'ers", as ppl that are heading into wh space simply performed some other manner of pve beforehand (ratting, plexing, standard exploration).

But what it seems to me that you're advocating is simply the removal of all these "isk faucets" and I would hazard a guess this is not a good thing. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

---

Originally by: CCP Whisper

---

Local chat in known 0.0, low sec and empire space will remain as it is today, in all it's insta-intel giving, afk cloaker panic inducing, jita trade spamming glory.

---

Originally by: Dreamwalker

---

I agree that CCP should keep out of the buy orders. If they feel they need to give a reward for the rats in space then let the players refine the loot or something but I don't want CCP going in and playing with the market.

And I would be happy to see all rats have no bounties and zero t1 loot; just the meta 1-4 loot drops.

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

Originally by: Shar Tegral

---

Thus, welcome to Eve Online: Hypocritia

---

I think you are just being paranoid now.

---

Originally by: EdFromHumanResources

---

Are you really not aware of trade routes that with a titan + freighters you can make tens of billions a day using only NPC buy orders that have been in existence for years? These are no more an isk faucet than bounties or mission rewards.

---

Originally by: Kwint Sommer

---

Originally by: EdFromHumanResources

---

Are you really not aware of trade routes that with a titan + freighters you can make tens of billions a day using only NPC buy orders that have been in existence for years? These are no more an isk faucet than bounties or mission rewards.

---

First off, it wasn't tens of billions a day. Secondly, what you're describing was removed a long time ago. Thirdly and most importantly, the existence of excessive ISK faucets is not a justification for adding more!

---

Originally by: Kazuo Ishiguro

---

I believe this is being blown up entirely out of proportion. It represents only a part of the rewards available from a part of the game that will in all probability affect only a tiny part of the player base compared to empire missions, insurance and 0.0 ratting. It makes no sense to complain about this particular isk source until all the larger ones have been dealt with.

---

Originally by: Seraph Castillon

---

Edited by: Seraph Castillon on 12/03/2009 20:49:59
Theoriticly this wouldn't be the cause of more isk being created. Only of it being created in different ways. A person can't mission and be ratting sleepers at the same time. His isk creation activity would just shift from one thing to another.
This assuming that sleeper ratting gets you an equal or less isk/hour ratio compared to lvl 4's.

Ofcourse with wormholes being the new toy that everyone wants to have played with, players that otherwise would not be creating isk now will be. So yes, there will be more isk created. At least for the first few months.

Note that this game needs isk to be created on a regular basis as with every player that quits or becomes inactive isk is taken out.

---

Originally by: EdFromHumanResources

---

Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 12/03/2009 21:30:11
The only really broken feature creating isk are all these massive scale hostile incursions in empire space where if I were to shoot a player id get instapopped by Concord. I think its a lot more likely CCP reduces the payouts and locations of missions over wormholes since wormholes actually involve risk for gain and dont ignore every sort of common sense when being implemented.

CCP has stated repeatedly they want risk vs reward to be balanced. Almost every aspect of mission running is giving that concept the finger.

---

Originally by: EdFromHumanResources

---

Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 12/03/2009 21:59:05
Yup, but just because they made ****ty choices and terrible market targeting doesnt mean the folks who play this game COOPERATIVELY WITH THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE need to be given the finger instead.

Missions havent been buffed in ages because....oh wait they have. LP market was created, many many missions were altered to make them easier and level 5 missions were added, more agents were added, entire regions of lowsec were added with special little agents of their own.

Now epic mission arcs are being introduced but yet people still claim CCP ignores the mission running crew when they actually know very well the massive part of the population that runs them.

These are the people complaining about wormhole rewards because quite frankly they will never be able to routinely reap the rewards of high end wormholes despite the fact its PvE content and these folks fancy themselves PvE'ers. The real joy is going to come when AI across eve is revamped to match sleepers as the devs stated will happen and hundreds of idiots lose CNR's every single day to their own idiocy and inability to deal with a shifting PvE situation revolving more around actually playing the game instead of "I win" fittings.

---

Originally by: EdFromHumanResources

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

The question is, WHY the hell have "portable bounties", why not just drop MORE T3-related stuff instead, as loot, not necessarily just as salvage ?

---

Counterpoint: Why not just make missions only drop more loot, no lp, no isk. Obviously the rewards of standings increase and loot balance things out and create a more player driven community.

---

Originally by: Anonymously Toasting

---

But to turn around and cut their isk stream by half, would probably force alot of quitting. Turning their relaxing game into a "grind" (really getting isk for these types of ppls wishes doesn't require any sense of grinding atm).

---

Originally by: Niccolado Starwalker

---

Please go sit in the corner, and dont forget to don the shame-on-you-hat!

---

Originally by: EdFromHumanResources

---

People who don't want competitive gameplay don't need to **** on the variety of PvE that a competitive player engages in. Every MMO almost has PvE for the casual player and the hardcore, the hardcore pretty much always is rewarded to a much higher extent yet in Eve they give that same variety of content with on par and actually LESS rewarding than the casual gameplay and the casual players have a problem with this why?

I don't seem to understand the broken aspect of being rewarded about as much as if I was mining or ratting in a new 0.0 region or one already in existence with poor true sec

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

1) With sleepers, there's not. The drop-rate is proportional to that of the people who actually does these sites, because they are virtually unlimited.

2) An argument against that is, that people just as well could do level 4's. Sure, the idea that bounties are loot rather than pay-outs directly to your wallet is nice, and something I have asked for, for ages. It still doesn't justify that of adding more ISK to the game, compared to what we already have. You also have to remember that the audience for wormholes is QUITE different. People who do level 4's atm aren't likely to try out wormholes. Thus the quantity of people taking part in PvE content which has this effect on the economy, will increase.

---

Originally by: EdFromHumanResources

---

The extreme danger of this new content makes it the only pve in this game I have found even remotely entertaining, taking away the reward for anything but a t3 producer is ignorant to say to the least.

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

Quote:

---

1. The time barrier to entry is high

---

I question that.
20 minutes with a probe and you will find a wormhole if you are any good.

---

Quote:

---

I'll rather have that people get the loot rather than getting blown up. Insurance is STILL an ISK faucet.

---

Originally by: EdFromHumanResources

---

I don't want to take down mission runners I am just pointing out the hypocrisy in their statements and accusations as to whats market breaking and this big scary inflation no can show me anywhere but timecards.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Originally by: EdFromHumanResources

---

The extreme danger of this new content makes it the only pve in this game I have found even remotely entertaining, taking away the reward for anything but a t3 producer is ignorant to say to the least.

---

Right... because YOU selling TO the T3 producer the loot/salvage is... how exactly worse than selling the Sleeper trade goods to the NPC buy orders ?
Oh, right, it's not worse, it's BETTER, since it will PAY MORE.

---

Originally by: Feng Schui

---

CCP wants the T3 ships to not drop below a certain price (hence the NPC buy orders).. that being said, IMO, let the market forces do their damn jobs and get rid of the buy orders.

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

Edited by: LaVista Vista on 12/03/2009 17:27:44

Originally by: Dextonia

---

I'm gonna try to not be rude or anything but how did you get on Csm?

Seems your either
1) Not very bright
2) Don't know the first thing about economics

I'm guessing that its number 2 and you just don't realize that it doesn't matter if people get Isk that did not exist in EvE before from bounties or market orders, the effect is the same so why should the market suddenly implode because of 4 new trade goods?

But if you have a hard believing me then just try to remember that DOCTOR Eyj= who works for Ccp has a DOCTORS degree in ECONOMICS, and theres a reason he has a job as the worlds only virtual economist.

---

You don't seem very bright either, because your post lacks everything but personal attacks.

EDIT: Actually, you made one small point. However it's flawed, as it's misrepresenting to my initial post.

Quote:

---

it doesn't matter if people get Isk that did not exist in EvE before from bounties or market orders, the effect is the same so why should the market suddenly implode because of 4 new trade goods?

---

I seriously just fail to see any effect that this makes that's worth making a post about, this is not going to cause any seriouse amount of inflation( if you don't believe me then you can go check out Dr. eyjo's dev blogs and there is probably a youtube video of him explaining why these so could isk faucets don't cause inflation).
This is not gonna stop people from selling and buying stuff from the market.

There is just no way this is going to put any bigger scar on the player-driven market than any other new item/service/feature.

You should really try to atleast make a argument for your statements.

Originally by: EdFromHumanResources

---

Hey Akita name a T3 producer I can sell to please, right now.

---

Quote:

---

Now name a few dozen more because they are going to have to eat the loot of pretty much everyone in the game

---

Quote:

---

if your hairbrained ideas were put in the game, driving the loot prices down so low it wouldnt be worth the time it took to scan down the initial wormhole.

---

Originally by: Anonymously Toasting

---

In wow the high end pve wasn't more lucrative than casual pve.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Originally by: EdFromHumanResources

---

Hey Akita name a T3 producer I can sell to please, right now.

---

Irrelevant.

Quote:

---

Now name a few dozen more because they are going to have to eat the loot of pretty much everyone in the game

---

Enough will appear sooner rather than later.

Quote:

---

if your hairbrained ideas were put in the game, driving the loot prices down so low it wouldnt be worth the time it took to scan down the initial wormhole.

---

Ok, what's better : NPC tradegoods worth 1 mil plus 3 mil worth of T3 stuff on average (meaning 4 mil), or just double amounts of T3 stuff worth about 30% less (meaning 4.2 mil) ?
And what's better, T3 ships at 500 mil ISK, or T3 ships at 400 mil ISK ?

---

Originally by: EdFromHumanResources

---

Ok so your argument is that these buy orders are game breaking and the solution is the somehow force players to pay a set price so we make more in the end......Ya sorry im not seeing any sort of logic there. Do you know what really happens when theres a flood of one item or another into a market? The price goes down, you're either mentally challenged or trolling either way I'm not giving you the dignity of another response unless you make an actual point

---

Originally by: EdFromHumanResources

---

The flaw I talked about is stated in your very post. You just fail to see it somehow. I will give you a few minutes to look for it.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Originally by: EdFromHumanResources

---

The flaw I talked about is stated in your very post. You just fail to see it somehow. I will give you a few minutes to look for it.

---

You THINK you see a flaw, point it out then.

---

Originally by: EdFromHumanResources

---

As you stated when something is common price goes down, if loot is made very common the price will go way down making it a worthless side of the game. Why on earth it would take a calculated drop(That you added into your "math") when people are always wanting to buy things as cheap as possible is beyond me.

---

Originally by: Petyr Baelich

---

And yes, I realize that inflation in a system is calculated off of every item, not just one market segment. However, if one segment grows at an almost geometric rate, and another is fairly static: inflation exists.

---

Originally by: EdFromHumanResources

---

Missions havent been buffed in ages because....oh wait they have. LP market was created, many many missions were altered to make them easier and level 5 missions were added, more agents were added, entire regions of lowsec were added with special little agents of their own.

---

Quote:

---

Now epic mission arcs are being introduced but yet people still claim CCP ignores the mission running crew when they actually know very well the massive part of the population that runs them.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Quote:

---

if your hairbrained ideas were put in the game, driving the loot prices down so low it wouldnt be worth the time it took to scan down the initial wormhole.

---

Ok, what's better : NPC tradegoods worth 1 mil plus 3 mil worth of T3 stuff on average (meaning 4 mil), or just double amounts of T3 stuff worth about 30% less (meaning 4.2 mil) ?
And what's better, T3 ships at 500 mil ISK, or T3 ships at 400 mil ISK ?

---

Originally by: Krathos Morpheus

---

Thats not true, Akita already pointed to all components neccesary for T3 construction being dropped by the rats.

---

Quote:

---

Also who thought he was the last to post here today? Cool

---

Originally by: Aricaan

---

Just want to say, that I like the idea of bounties that you have to turn in.

---

Originally by: Linda Tradition

---

i totally agree.
there are enough sources where isk come into the game. with this npc-buyorders, there is a lot more money coming into the game AND the prices are limited.

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

Originally by: Aricaan

---

Just want to say, that I like the idea of bounties that you have to turn in.

---

Don't get me wrong. I think ti's an improvement over the the current bounty system.

But it should have been done for rats in general, not sleepers. Sleepers should drop T3 stuff.

---

Originally by: Kylar Renpurs

---

Whatever it's worth, if it goes off to the table, so does my vote to someone else.

---

Quote:

---

For me you haven't explained why this will be an increase in isk faucets as a large percentage of the people that will be fighting Sleepers are people that instead, in the same time, would have been ratting or doing L4 missions.

---

Quote:

---

The sellable loot grant a minimum (and really low wage level) return from the activity.

---

Quote:

---

The only report I have seen in this thread about the return of hunting Sleepers and selling that lot is mine. 3 millions for 50 minutes of actual combat (scanning and exploring not factored).

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

Quote:

---

For me you haven't explained why this will be an increase in isk faucets as a large percentage of the people that will be fighting Sleepers are people that instead, in the same time, would have been ratting or doing L4 missions.

---

That's where I disagree with you. It will NOT be the same people, in my opinion. Because there's a fundamental greater risk of doing wormholes. Those who do level 4's aren't willing to take that risk.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The sellable loot grant a minimum (and really low wage level) return from the activity.

---

I don't disagree that people should be compensated. But not by pumping more ISK into the economy. There should simply be a demand for the dropped items. Not NPC buy orders.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The only report I have seen in this thread about the return of hunting Sleepers and selling that lot is mine. 3 millions for 50 minutes of actual combat (scanning and exploring not factored).

---

That's why there should be a player-driven market for the loot, where the actual return is HIGHER, while creating a thriving market.

---

Originally by: Muroth

---

While LaVista correctly states that new people (i.e., more PVP-leaning) will shoot Sleepers, they are "creating" T3 materials at the same time as generating new isk, so this really isn't a problem since both isk and goods are increasing.

---

Originally by: Muroth

---

Edited by: Muroth on 13/03/2009 12:42:58
Rhetorical: who is going to manufacture in a market where prices are always dropping?

---

Originally by: Ricdic

---

CCP has been really smart creating wormhole space. Hundreds of ships and modules being destroyed, self destructed and ejected as pilots pod their way home. It's a great way to remove isk from the system.

---

Originally by: Muroth

---

Aside from Akita, everyone has been focusing only on isk injection. Akita did comment on the fact that if you didn't have isk injection, the going price for whatever loot was dropped by T3 would drop (as they would), but I disagree with the assertion that lower prices "would be a benefit for everyone." (Rhetorical: who is going to manufacture in a market where prices are always dropping?)

---

Originally by: Ricdic

---

CCP has been really smart creating wormhole space. Hundreds of ships and modules being destroyed, self destructed and ejected as pilots pod their way home. It's a great way to remove isk from the system.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

High supply, high demand, lower prices, higher volumes, same or higher income levels for everybody involved.

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

Originally by: Kylar Renpurs

---

Whatever it's worth, if it goes off to the table, so does my vote to someone else.

---

Huh, what are you talking about?

---

Originally by: Drab Cane

---

Point 1)
However, eventual data will most likely show that players who are drinking from the W-space faucet are the same players that would otherwise be drinking from some other faucet. So, no net increase to the inflow of ISK into the economy.

---

Originally by: Ricdic

---

CCP has been really smart creating wormhole space. Hundreds of ships and modules being destroyed, self destructed and ejected as pilots pod their way home. It's a great way to remove isk from the system.

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

Originally by: Aricaan

---

Just want to say, that I like the idea of bounties that you have to turn in.

---

Don't get me wrong. I think ti's an improvement over the the current bounty system.

But it should have been done for rats in general, not sleepers. Sleepers should drop T3 stuff.

---

Originally by: Cor Aidan

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

High supply, high demand, lower prices, higher volumes, same or higher income levels for everybody involved.

---

All else being equal, if the total amount of isk coming into the game is X per person-hour, how can any change of price/volume get more than X per person-hour for everyone involved? Same, yes, I'll agree that's possible. I'll even warrant that many will get richer because of T3, the per-capita income rate will not change.

---

Originally by: Power Sauce

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

Originally by: Kylar Renpurs

---

Whatever it's worth, if it goes off to the table, so does my vote to someone else.

---

Huh, what are you talking about?

---

You've lost my vote if it goes to the CSM table. I think you've actually lost the plot in relation to this. I'm just glad that CCP can reject terrible ideas raised in CSM.

---

Originally by: Professor Leech

---

Originally by: Drab Cane

---

Point 1)
However, eventual data will most likely show that players who are drinking from the W-space faucet are the same players that would otherwise be drinking from some other faucet. So, no net increase to the inflow of ISK into the economy.

---

There will probably be a reduction in isk generation due to people spending time probing and trying to find their way back. Alternatively, getting blown up by someone else in the wormhole.

This could be a solution to the macro farmers that sit in 0.0 systems all day farming bounties. Force them to haul the loot back to a station.

It's unfortunate that our CSM representative doesn't have a realistic perspective on this.

---

Quote:

---

There is a rational concern about the possibility that both (i) W-space amounts to a substantial net ISK faucet, and (ii) such a faucet is actually a problem for the player-economy.

---

Quote:

---

While the CSM could remind CCP to look at this topic, I don't think it's necessary to do so, and so not a high priority.

---

Originally by: Maestro Del'Tirith

---

I think the massive amounts of lost ships and equipment that these more intelligent NPCs seem to generate more than compensates.

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

Edited by: LaVista Vista on 13/03/2009 21:14:14

Originally by: Maestro Del'Tirith

---

I think the massive amounts of lost ships and equipment that these more intelligent NPCs seem to generate more than compensates.

---

Talk about not reading the thread.

Insurance is an ISK faucet. It will only make the problem even worse.

EDIT: Reading your post over and over again, I'm not actually QUITE sure what you are saying. It seemed to me like you said that the loss of ships will make up for the increase in ISK it will cause.

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

Originally by: Ricdic

---

CCP has been really smart creating wormhole space. Hundreds of ships and modules being destroyed, self destructed and ejected as pilots pod their way home. It's a great way to remove isk from the system.

---

How can an ISK faucet remove ISK from the game?

---

Originally by: Tesal

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

Originally by: Ricdic

---

CCP has been really smart creating wormhole space. Hundreds of ships and modules being destroyed, self destructed and ejected as pilots pod their way home. It's a great way to remove isk from the system.

---

How can an ISK faucet remove ISK from the game?

---

I think you are badly mistaken in the kind of isk being made off of these items. I think that wormholes were already nerfed once by taking out minable moons. The isk from the NPC items is pitiful because it has to be divided over an entire gang. Nerfing that makes an already stupid system even worse. There is a huge risk of wormholes being irrelevant, and what you are proposing will make that a certainty. My advice to you is to undock, find a wormhole, and try it out. You will be badly disappointed in the rewards you get compared to the kind of force you need to bring and the risks you have to take and the amount of time it takes. As far as I can see, rewards are below ship replacement value. Wormholes have been severely pre-nerfed, they need a buff, not another huge nerf. They are not economically viable as a corp or alliance activity right now.

---

Originally by: Maestro Del'Tirith

---

I would want to know what sort of modules they are expected to drop... i.e. are they things that manufacturing folks can already make?

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

There's no realistic perspective in this when it's all speculation.

It all comes down to certain variables, which we can't know. We all fundamentally agree about the mechanics involved(Other than Ricdic), however we have different opinions about peoples behavior.

Not to forget the idealistic views that aren't shared by everybody.

---

Originally by: Sophie Daigneau

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

There's no realistic perspective in this when it's all speculation.

It all comes down to certain variables, which we can't know. We all fundamentally agree about the mechanics involved(Other than Ricdic), however we have different opinions about peoples behavior.

Not to forget the idealistic views that aren't shared by everybody.

---

QFT

Why don't you calm down and see how the market plays out over the next few months instead of automatically jumping to conclusions. If after a few months it turns out to be an issue the CSM can bring it up then. At this point we just don't know how big the long term impact will be from the change.

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

I'm suggesting that maybe the best approach is to make them drop things which PLAYERS use for something. Supply and demand baby!

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

.
You just have to add enough stuff tothem, so that you could actually build T3 JUST from killing (a lot of) Sleepers and nothing else (eventually).
Sure, some of the stuff they drop would be more easily found hacking/analysing/gasmining/whatever, but they'd drop some things that could refine, transform, react or reverse-engineer into all needed components.

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

I'm suggesting that maybe the best approach is to make them drop things which PLAYERS use for something. Supply and demand baby!

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Everybody involved in T3 (gathering, manufacture, trade, users of), of course, not everybody on the server
How it's better for the gatherers it's obvious. Manufacturers and traders, they usually live on margins, so the higher the volume, the better. Users of, obviously, cheaper is better for them.
...
And that's all I was saying.

---

Originally by: Venkul Mul

---

You both know the market well but seem bent of proposing a new drone regions system or T1 unnamed loot system.
A small isk inflow (that I am convinced will be less of what the same players will get from other sources in the same times if they were not doing WH space exploration) terrific you so much that you prefer to kill all the other professions in WH space?
Hacking with guns, codebreaking with guns, gas harvesting with guns ... what is the next step? Exploring with guns?

---

Quote:

---

I can't run for another term. Just saying'.

---

Originally by: Kylar Renpurs

---

Edited by: Kylar Renpurs on 13/03/2009 23:16:40

Quote:

---

I can't run for another term. Just saying'.

---

Doesn't change the fact you've lost the plot with this one. You've brought some pretty good issues to the table before, but this one just plain stinks.

Introducing this sort of mechanic is what they should've done for *all* NPCs, especially the rogue drones. Tag drops/ NPC 'research' items, stuff like that, to the value of what the bounty would normally be. It's definately not a *new* way of creating ISK, you could always trade Navy tags in for ISK to NPC buy orders.

Gives macro-ratters (and mission runners) a swift kick by not being able to farm bounties anymore.

Because some people are lazy and would sooner take up mining or trading rather than having to go around to *every* wreck and loot it, and it'd create a bit more of a time-sink, the overall strength of the ISK faucet caused by these items would probably be no greater than the current faucet caused by bounties, especially bounties recieved by macro-ratters who fall into the "too lazy to loot" category.

CCP (finally) takes a step in the right direction for once and all you can do is criticize it?

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

It depends on the average make-up of sleeper loot.
If you only introduce TRACE amounts of the other needed materials, there's always the need to supplement the rest from other sources, so you don't "kill" the professions.
At the same time, it provides you with enough materials so in case the other professions just don't kick in, at least some products can be made, and the market gets bootstrapped.
It's not as if I am asking for the average loot drops of Sleepers to be almost identical in proportion to what's needed to create T3 ships... or worse, to have more of the "secondary" things.
No, I'm merely asking to ramp up the drops of stuff that already drops, and add trace amounts of "everything else" in some form, while removing the "drop this at a station for guaranteed ISK" items altogether.

---

Quote:

---

it provides you with enough materials so in case the other professions just don't kick in, at least some products can be made

---

Quote:

---

I disagree. Not without doing something with the loot they drop. If you must loot to get your rewards, then more loot is collected and the "minerals from loot" get worse.

---

Originally by: Venkul Mul

---

It don't work that way, the kind of balance that you suggest here don't exist.

---

Quote:

---

Between spending hours gathering gases in a single location in a almost weaponless ship, not even well suited to the task as a the "best" gas harvesting ship is a battleship and using it to fight sleepers and get "trace" amounts multiplied for all the kills that you can do in several hours, what way most EVE players will follow?

---

Quote:

---

Between gimping a ship with codebreaker and analyzer and using the same 2 middle slot for combat stuff, how many will mount the hacking and codebreaking tools and how many will prefer some combat related stuff if there was a chance to get the same materials fighting?

---

Quote:

---

Sleepers ships will be easily found [...] while hacking/codebreaking and gas harvesting sites will require more scanning (lost time) specialized tools not used in combat (and PvP will be always behind the corner) so your "trace" elements will be either meaningless as they will be 1/100.000 chance, or they will become the primary source.

---

Originally by: Cor Aidan

---

yes, NPC buy orders are putting more isk into the system. However, what you're forgetting is the same activity that is producing that isk is also, on average, producing more goods in the form of T3 materials. This is the correct way to keep money supply growing in line with new production: if you only introduced new tradable goods (T3 components) without new sources of isk, you'd end up with deflation instead as more goods would be chasing around less (proportional) isk.

I was not around when the drone regions were introduced, but the general consensus is that they "crashed the mineral markets" because suddenly the increase of goods was faster than the increase in isk: deflation. Since sleepers are apparently sans bounty, if you had no way to create isk from NPC buy orders we would certainly see deflation again.

So until you have a good proposal for a central bank or some other way to dynamically control the money supply in line with wealth production the addition of new sources of isk simultaneously with and in proportion to new wealth production is the only way to hope to keep basic price parity.

---

Quote:

---

Doesn't change the fact you've lost the plot with this one. You've brought some pretty good issues to the table before, but this one just plain stinks.

---

Quote:

---

Introducing this sort of mechanic is what they should've done for *all* NPCs, especially the rogue drones. Tag drops/ NPC 'research' items, stuff like that, to the value of what the bounty would normally be. It's definately not a *new* way of creating ISK, you could always trade Navy tags in for ISK to NPC buy orders.

---

Quote:

---

Gives macro-ratters (and mission runners) a swift kick by not being able to farm bounties anymore.

---

Quote:

---

CCP (finally) takes a step in the right direction for once and all you can do is criticize it?

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

What if, by killing sleepers, on average, on top of 10 item A you ALSO get 1 item B and 1 item C ?
By your logic, somehow, for some reason, now suddendly consider that killing sleeper would become the MAIN source of materials - as in, there will be so many of items B and C that everybody that really wants to build/buy a T3 ship can get one easily.
What could that possibly mean ? Well, first off, it would mean out of a Sleeper kill, the vast majority of the kill value would be composed out of items B and C, and item A would be practically worthless.
But... wait... doesn't mining gas or hacking/salvaging give you 10 times as many of either item B or item C per hour (or 5 times more combined) spent doing it ?
I fail to see how earning 5 times more cash would "KILL" the wormhole professions.

---

Originally by: Togen Lei

---

LVV if the CSM's propose a change to CCP please have a few good suggestions to provide CCP for replacements to these NPC only drops. Please do not suggest that we kill another profession just to support the 'player market'. Yes this is an ISK faucet, but anything that drops will be an ISK faucet, therefore it's a mute point. Let them drop these (relatively) cheap items and see where it goes, at least it isn't affecting the other areas other than the fact that no one can run market manipulations on them.

---

Originally by: Togen Lei

---

The sleepers should not drop any materials that would otherwise come from hacking/mining just to 'jump start the market'.

---

Quote:

---

These items should only be available from the professions that they were intended to come from.

---

Quote:

---

This would once again be the equivilant of mining with guns (or hacking with guns). If CCP wants these NPC purchased items to replace the bounty system, I say let them, as there isn't many things that could be dropped (on a regular basis) by the sleeper rats that wouldn't imbalance the market.

---

Quote:

---

Gas....so why mine at all when I can put a squad together and collect enough to build 1 or 2 T3 ships in a few hours of scanning/killing.

---

Quote:

---

Yes this is an ISK faucet, but anything that drops will be an ISK faucet

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Quote:

---

Yes this is an ISK faucet, but anything that drops will be an ISK faucet

---

FALSE ! So wrong, I want to kick you.
It's NOT an ISK faucet if it doesn't lead to the creation of ISK.
The fact YOU get ISK for the stuff from another player is NOT an ISK faucet.
Only when NPCs purchase the goods, THEN you have an ISK faucet.

---

Quote:

---

The only difference between selling to another player vs selling to NPC buy orders is the fact that you set the price you want for the item. The mod/salvage/officer drop didn't cost you more than ammo to get (or the cost of a crystal) yet you get mods, some of which are worth 100's of millions.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Originally by: Venkul Mul

---

Between gimping a ship with codebreaker and analyzer and using the same 2 middle slot for combat stuff, how many will mount the hacking and codebreaking tools and how many will prefer some combat related stuff if there was a chance to get the same materials fighting?

---

Let's have a hypothetical example.
Let's say you would only need THREE types of things to build any T3 ship and nothing else : some salvage from sleeper wrecks (item A), some gas mined from wormhole sites (item B), and some objects that can be obtained by either hacking or analyzing (item C).
Let's also say you need, umm, 100 of each to make a full ship, for simplicity's sake.
Now, if on average you get 10 A per hour killing sleepers, 10 B per hour mining gas and 10 C per hour hacking, it becomes pretty obvious that the PRICE of item A will be at best the same as that for item B or item C, since, as you so nicely pointed out, people hate to have to resort to modules that aren't good in PvP situations when pushed into a potentially hostile environment.

Let's assume for a second that items A, B and C would have the exact same price, even if common logic already dictates that item A should be slightly cheaper already, and therefore mining gas or hacking/salvaging is already MORE profitable than just hunting sleepers.

What if, by killing sleepers, on average, on top of 10 item A you ALSO get 1 item B and 1 item C ?
By your logic, somehow, for some reason, now suddendly consider that killing sleeper would become the MAIN source of materials - as in, there will be so many of items B and C that everybody that really wants to build/buy a T3 ship can get one easily.
What could that possibly mean ? Well, first off, it would mean out of a Sleeper kill, the vast majority of the kill value would be composed out of items B and C, and item A would be practically worthless.
But... wait... doesn't mining gas or hacking/salvaging give you 10 times as many of either item B or item C per hour (or 5 times more combined) spent doing it ?
I fail to see how earning 5 times more cash would "KILL" the wormhole professions.

---

Originally by: Cergorach

---

A.) The real problem LaVista Vista tries to point out is that folks that weren't exploring isk faucets before, will do so now, with the introduction of Wormhole Space. I find that very hard to believe. Because the only folks I can think of that don't use the isk faucets are the pure PvP players and the industrialists/traders. While I can see that PVPers might be attracted to W-Space, I don't see the industrialists/traders leaving that role. As far as I've seen, the pure PVPers are a very small percentage of the player base.

---

Originally by: Pattern Clarc

---

send it to the assembly room and i'll support.

---

Originally by: Togen Lei

---

The only difference between selling to another player vs selling to NPC buy orders is the fact that you set the price you want for the item.

---

Quote:

---

The mod/salvage/officer drop didn't cost you more than ammo to get (or the cost of a crystal) yet you get mods, some of which are worth 100's of millions.

---

Quote:

---

And as for the mining with guns, I wasn't referring to the drone regions, any ratting or mission running is the same thing. You get drops, sell the valuable ones, and refine what's left.....this is mining with guns. If you read through a few of the posts in the MD forums you might actually see the one that has a very nice discussion on this.
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=989786

---

Originally by: LaVista Vista

---

Originally by: Danny Centurai

---

Please could you explain why you think this is an issue?

This is just the same as rats having bounties and they are actually worth less than good rats in 0.0 space the only difference is you can't simply farm them as you have to get all the stuff home.

Personally I see no issue with these buy orders unless the same sleeper components are used somewhere in T3 ship construction which I don't believe they are.

---

The items in question aren't used for anything but the NPC buy-orders, much like overseer items.

But the problem is that it's an ISK faucet. Why would you do something like this when level 4 missions are bad enough of a problem already. Sure, there's more risk here. But EVE is all about it's player-driven market. If an item has no usage beyond being converted into ISK(ISK Faucet).

---

Originally by: Venkul Mul

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

hypothetical example[...]100 of each to make a T3 ship[...]on average you get 10 A per hour killing sleepers, 10 B per hour mining gas and 10 C per hour hacking[...]What if, by killing sleepers, on average, on top of 10 item A you ALSO get 1 item B and 1 item C ?[...]doesn't mining gas or hacking/salvaging give you 10 times as many of either item B or item C per hour (or 5 times more combined) spent doing it ?I fail to see how earning 5 times more cash would "KILL" the wormhole professions.

---

There are several reasons why a player will prefer to fight the Sleepers instead of harvesting gas or hacking/analyzing if the sleeper would drop all the components for T3 reeinginering and constructions:
1) he will have a ship ready to fight all the dangers of WH-space (NPC and PC) instead of a ship partially or totally unable to fight

---

Quote:

---

2) he will need to spend less time searching for the sites;
3) he will not be in a static location (for gas harvesting) with the need of having his fleet leave someone there to defend him from sleepers and other players.

---

Quote:

---

Sure he will make 10 A, 1 B and 1 C every hour instead of 10 B or 10 C, but if B is gas harvesting, in reality at best it will be 2 persons to make 10 B (guard and harvester).

---

Quote:

---

Most players will prefer to fight and price the B and C part higher than play the easy target and get larger quantity of B and C. It will become like the salvage today, you get the 500 isk part at the same time of the 100.000 isk, but at the end you gather all and sell/use what you can.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Seriously, you can argue with something, but when you reach a conclusion that's obviously ridiculous, you'd better conceede that you might be wrong.
In this case, you're totally wrong about the "killing professions" part.
Yes, it makes them "not really all that absolutely necessary", but they're still better payment-wise than the alternative.
That's not a KILLED profession, that's a THRIVING profession.

---

Quote:

---

Gas sites are apparently the only ones without Sleeper guards (or so at least says the preliminary chart of T3 production we were served), so all you have to watch out for are other players.

---

Quote:

---

If you claim "finding the site is more difficult than just scanning for encounters" and that "everybody will just want to fight normal sleepers", where's the real risk for those that try to do gas mining ? I mean, you practically said nobody will bother searching for them...

---

Originally by: Venkul Mul

---

From my experience of the people that will mostly enter WH space most of them will not bother gas harvesting or hacking if they could get the same stuff in another way, even if way less efficiently. Naturally it is an opinion.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

If you claim "finding the site is more difficult than just scanning for encounters" and that "everybody will just want to fight normal sleepers", where's the real risk for those that try to do gas mining ? I mean, you practically said nobody will bother searching for them...

---

You know, the first thing for wick I scan in WH space is ships. I do that for self protection, but I am sure most people do that and being in 0.0 with non blue they act by consequence.
So there is no safety even if no Sleeper will spawn in gas sites.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Gas sites are apparently the only ones without Sleeper guards (or so at least says the preliminary chart of T3 production we were served), so all you have to watch out for are other players.

---

I hadn't noticed that, link to this piece of information please?

---

Originally by: CCP Dropbear

---

Thought this may help people wrap their heads around the process. Diagram of Tech III Production

---

Originally by: Sillas Cov

---

The OP concerns are unfounded. There are very very significant barriers to farming Wrom holes for trade goods via sleeper spawns.

Ive just spent 12 hours , preparing, scanning, fleeting to W Hole, killing hard shelled Sleepers, dodging piwates in low sec and within the W space, to finnaly take out 12 spawns.

The I had to fly to Jita to find out I have made 150 mil in loot and NPC sleeper trade goods....

While risking my mission raven in low sec, and the other ships as well.

To be split between 4 gang mates....

Oh yes.... the isk is just flowing in huge amounts....

Ummm, not from the sleeper npc trade good drops alone, sorry, but that's so not the case.

BUT, BUT, I've had a seriously fun time with this new expedition aspect of the game....very very cool.

No the isk faucet is in lvl 4s and 0.0 rating... ect and we all know this...

I shake my head.

Onward

Sillas

---

Quote:

---

That might be true but the fact is why do we need another faucet when we have current faucets already. Now I do not think all the faucets should go away by any means but we need less of them so no reason to have another one injected into the system.

---

Originally by: Kylar Renpurs

---

Quote:

---

That might be true but the fact is why do we need another faucet when we have current faucets already. Now I do not think all the faucets should go away by any means but we need less of them so no reason to have another one injected into the system.

---

Why do we need less of them? I've seen no good reason why there *must* be less of them? There's no out-of-control inflation out there. Most talk's indicated deflation really.

---

Quote:

---

Less faucets would lead more development of the player economy because all of a sudden if you want ISK the easiest way may not to be go ratting in 0.0 so on and so forth. More developed player economy gives CCP more to brag about and helps the players a lot because then there is more involvement in the game and more wars because then resources become more important. I know there are a fair number of people that just wanna PvE so sorry but I would rather PvE not be the major money maker.

---

Originally by: Kylar Renpurs

---

Edited by: Kylar Renpurs on 15/03/2009 06:50:33

So you just want to change the way people play the game? Nice.

Less faucets wouldn't have worked when this game first came out, less faucets now would just backpedal the economy slowly but surely.

---

Quote:

---

I am not saying we get rid of missions. I am more saying we get rid of trade goods or well NPC involvement in them.

---