Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Diomedes Calypso
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 22:25:00 -
[1]
Deflation - based on insurance chages - anyway around it? (I posted similar in a response in a general discussion thread, but i think deflation itself is something worth battering around here)
Stipulating : The ore market will stablize somewhere, where we don't know (thats another discussion with plenty of threads) ... lets leave ore price changes out here.
Anytime a insured ship is blown up Ore (and a few other items) gets converted to ISK. Changes to insurance will certainly reduce the numbers of ships built then. intentionally blown up.
If 10% less isk is going to flow into the game that should have across the board influences on all prices if its not replaced.
Corralary : If players engaged in the greater insurance fraud driven industry try to replace that isk flow, that would mean more mission and rat kills à the other sources of ISK to players from CCP.
That switch would mean a higher supply of named items flooding to market, perhaps torpedoing those prices to next to nothing if supply surpasses demand (thatÆs how commodity markets work) . There will be a little increased demand by eliminating meta 0 drops but most of those were melted anyway.
|
Shar Tegral
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 22:44:00 -
[2]
Here's a thread you might use to discuss this. Here's a video to explain why.
Wealth, howsoever got, in Eve makes Lords of morons and gentlemen of thieves; Aptitude and intellect are needless here; 'Tis impudence and money that grants fame. |
Ran Khanon
Amarr Vengeance Innovations
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 22:56:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Ran Khanon on 07/04/2010 23:03:58 There's a way to prevent deflation, it's been used in many mmorpgs. But I don't think we'd want it here: npc 'traders' with fixed prices.
It is a good thing that CCP is going for a player controlled market without unintended isk faucets like security fraud but I am really curious about the consequences. I don't think that the security fraudsters will all start missioning all of a sudden though. A manufacturer is a manufacturer not only to make a nice amount of isk with but also because (s)he likes that play style (at least that goes for a lot of them I suppose).
It could very well be that a big chunk of insurance fraudsters just focus more and more on producing T2 modules, valuable ships and other stuff with nice margins instead. Which means that the sudden drop in demand on minerals won't be so very heavy as some people think. Also suddenly there is some creativity to find a manufacturing niche and interest and knowledge of the market required from them now instead of clicking platinum insurance, undock and self destruct as quickly as possible.
This + the lower amount of minerals coming from missions could mean that mineral prices aren't so very affected at all. But also that T2 module prices and other manufactured goodies with a nice margin could drop quite a bit due to increased competition. I guess you are right in saying that meta 1-4 prices will drop quite a bit though.
But here I am speculating things with only a sliver of understanding of the EVE economy. Sorry for that, I'll be off now! :-)
Help us to make parrots game related today! |
Alice Celadon
|
Posted - 2010.04.07 23:11:00 -
[4]
@OP -- Please change the name of this thread to "Deflation in Tyrannis". That does deserve its own thread separate from the mineral wonks.
I too had the knee-jerk reaction to insurance changes, "OMG isk deflation incoming!" This surprised me, because the economics of T3 seemed to perfectly fit the gameplay CCP wanted them to, and I was of the opinion that CCP had finally gotten the hang of managing their in-game economy (I'm not trolling here, I really have begun to see extensive thought evident in the changes they propose).
So before jumping to a wild conclusion like I did, make two lists:
Deflationary forces in Tyrannis Insurance fraud ends. "Normal use" insurance isk faucet drops with mineral prices. *Possible* isk sink in the form of npc seeded planetary stuff.
Inflationary forces in Tyrannis Nanite paste. Blueprints. Control Towers. Skillbooks. <--!!!! POS fuel. All of these things could go player-seeded overnight. That means a gigantic amount of isk stays in circulation.
So really, the question is how well will CCP balance it? In fact, if I had to guess I'd say that the insurance changes are a Reaction to a problem they foresaw with player-seeded POS fuel, nanite paste etc. (Inflation). Because at the end of the day they provide content, developers probably came up with the planetary idea and framework first, and then PhD guy said "Uh oh, inflation! Let's fix the stupid mineral/insurance/base cost thing that I've hated since the day you hired me to balance that out."
|
Diomedes Calypso
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 00:12:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Diomedes Calypso on 08/04/2010 00:13:47 @ Shar yes, IÆve read that thread and many others . I æve learned a lot from them but I feel they get excessively broad and I havenÆt seen the more monetary Deflation discussed in and of itself. I re-read the entire six pages and even watched your chiding video
I stupulated the ore price ... and tried to make it as clear as possible that I was trying to start a thread on a different issueà the effect of elimination of an isk faucet. (perhaps I muddied it a bit for some people with the corarlary but I wanted to also address that snap answer)
@) Ran yes, thatÆs been my take and I proposed it in a longer development thread, but that thread was about All changes in tyranis and made the thread an unwieldy place to parse out the both the merits of NPC participation in markets and more importantly the Adjustment of markets from a sudden withdrawal of a fair portion of the money supply spigot.
I did like your thoughts that industrialists would be reluctant to turn to missions(I tend to agree) that suggests that the monetary supply flow will not be quickly replaced.
What I do not follow are your comments of how a switch to T2 production could counter the deflationary pressure from closing a faucet. That would not increase ISK flow into the game (although it is an example of deflationary pressures spreading from one market to another as market forces level out profitablity per player time hour of activities)
@ Alice IÆ tried to be as specific as I could with the title I am not intersted in rehashing some good conversations (and continuing) on the overall effect on various production marketsà but IÆm glad you think that deflation deserves a thread in itself.
IÆm afraid that I donÆt unterstand how your list of Nanite Paste, Blue Prints Control Towers Skill books pos fuel are flows of Isk into the game. IÆm not entirely sure what you mean by player seeded either as I missed its inclusion in any ccp notes.
BUT I guess I am following you if youÆre suggesting that if CCP Closed Isk sinks by letting players produce skillbooks to sell to other players that could incrementally offset the elimination of an isk faucetà.
Reducing current sinks in proportion to the reduction of current faucets would be an answer that I hadnÆt noticed in other threads and thanks for pointing it out. ThatÆs not happening right away , is it?
To others coming in to the thread.
Can we try keep this to effects on a decrease of Isk in circulation ? and to a degree any ideas on how responses proposed would replace the isk flow and a brief reason why those wouldnÆt be deflationary in themselves? (I donÆt want to put words in anyones mouths.. the replies from Ran and Alice did give thoughts on the monetary supply issue)
|
Dark Lightening
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 00:46:00 -
[6]
The assumption that 10% of new isk to the game is going to stop flowing because of no more insurance fraud ignores the increases in T2 insurance for certain ship types. Up to 60% coverage for the most risky to fly T2's. Since real PVP ship losses drastically outnumber insurance fraud ship loses, and since T2 ships have become so popular, this may in fact result in a net increase in isk flow into the game.
|
Alice Celadon
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 00:47:00 -
[7]
Ok, for everyone who reads this thread and understands currency liquidity and realizes that I'm vastly oversimplifying -- sorry in advance.
[sing-songy voice] Picture all the isk in EVE as an apple pie.
Diomedes to CCP: Hey no fair you're not gonna give us as much apple pie when Tyrannis comes. A slice is going to be missing from what you give us each month!
CCP to Diomedes: Ah, but you see, every month we've been taking about a slice of pie away from you. All those POSes and non-ice POS fuel and Blueprints and Skills you bought cost you a slice of pie. Don't worry, just as much Apple Pies 4 u when we stop taking that slice away!!!
Diomedes to CCP: I don't get it, how can we be sure there's still as much Apple Pie around?? Won't this just mean that the people who start making the non-ice POS fuel and all that other stuff on planets will start hoarding my apple pies?? Pie Hoarders!!!
CCP to Diomedes: Actually, we're trying to stop Apple Pie hoarding and increase Apple Pie availability. There are lots of planets all over, and lots of people with Apple Pie and POSes (T2 producers, nullsec alliances, WH producers, etc.) who need that fuel. More pie being traded and not just given and taken by us!!!
Yay yay Apple Pie! Tyrannis is coming and we're not gonna die! CCP is sick of trillion-isk inactive accounts and concomitant deflation. Gonna prompt liquidity from endgame producers by having their revenue streams be dependent on diffuse sources of POS fuel and skillbooks (10 mil a pop for those science alts) and other stuff they'll have to get from newer players playing with their planets....ation.
Yay yay Apple Pie! Tyrannis is coming and we're not gonna die! The above analysis is deeply flawed because what matters is not the static supply of total available isk but the amount of isk that's exchanging hands on a daily basis. Dominion could very well have been entitled "Tax the Funjob out of those Wealthy 0.0 Entities Whose Isk is Just Sitting There and Disperse their Moongoo in Preparation for a Massive Overhaul of how Wealth is Distributed in EVE".
[/sing-songy voice]
|
Alice Celadon
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 00:57:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Dark Lightening The assumption that 10% of new isk to the game is going to stop flowing because of no more insurance fraud ignores the increases in T2 insurance for certain ship types. Up to 60% coverage for the most risky to fly T2's. Since real PVP ship losses drastically outnumber insurance fraud ship loses, and since T2 ships have become so popular, this may in fact result in a net increase in isk flow into the game.
Not sufficient. Diomedes does have a point that it will no longer be worthwhile to detonate insured ships for profit and this does have a real impact on isk supply -- let's call the amount of isk introduced to EVE Isk Faucet/hr.
IF/hr for insurance frauding Abaddons assuming one exploded every two minutes is ~2billion IF/hr. Considering that the next closest IF/hr activity is running anoms in nullsec for ~70million IF/hr, that is a very big deal.
|
Diomedes Calypso
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 01:35:00 -
[9]
Alice. Thanks for the last post (less so for the sing songy one)
yes you have answered my question and I guess in my first follow up I didn't make it clear that while I realized cutting out an isk sink would work that I didn't know that they were going to ne implemented simaltaneusly
these forums threads do have reasons. Questions arent always about whining for apple pie
in the dozens of pages I read I've missed the points about planetary reactions eliminating isk sinks. And i am sure that others might have done the same. Ithoght they were about new items that I'd get my head around later
thanks again for taking the time to answer |
Diomedes Calypso
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 01:48:00 -
[10]
It's hard to gauge whether the sum of lowere payments on t1 ships higher payments on t2 ships and some significantly less insurance on capital ships would increase or decrease total isk creation through non ier driven insurance
I'd guess that it would be a wash with the ier elimination being the delta fwiw that is. My question was answered with the planetary stuff |
|
Forum Dweller
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 02:30:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Diomedes Calypso It's hard to gauge whether the sum of lowere payments on t1 ships higher payments on t2 ships and some significantly less insurance on capital ships would increase or decrease total isk creation through non ier driven insurance
The majority of NPC insurance premiums go unclaimed, and fall into the black hole of nothingness that is the insurance system.
Anyone ever asked why CCP doesn't incorporate an in-game insurance investment fund? Simply:
- Create UI for those interested in investing ISK into this fund
- Make sure in the UI it states approximate ISK already invested, and approximate ROI/month, week or whatever
- Allow users to withdraw their investment at will, creating the first CCP backed investment
This wouldn't be too hard for them to incorporate and would act almost like a car insurance company in RL, except it's all automated. Of course the system could adjust %'s of interest based on how much ISK people have invested, and would push the return down when too many people have entered into the fund.
Ta-da, no more ISK sink related to insurance.
Discuss
|
Packtu'sa
Nabaal Construction and Industrials Corp Nabaal Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 03:06:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Forum Dweller Ta-da, no more ISK sink related to insurance. Discuss
The real solution is player-run insurance. It won't happen yet, since nobody's developed it enough to start accepting premiums. To a certain degree, player-run insurance will only shine once CCP removes its (cheating) competition, but we'll see what role insurance plays once its prices are more dynamic.
Apologies for the thread derail.
Packtu'sa Founder/CEO, Nabaal Construction and Industrials Corp [NCIC] |
Forum Dweller
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 04:37:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Packtu'sa
Originally by: Forum Dweller Ta-da, no more ISK sink related to insurance. Discuss
The real solution is player-run insurance. It won't happen yet, since nobody's developed it enough to start accepting premiums. To a certain degree, player-run insurance will only shine once CCP removes its (cheating) competition, but we'll see what role insurance plays once its prices are more dynamic.
Apologies for the thread derail.
Although I do agree with your main idea, I don't believe a 100% player-run insurance company would fix the problem.
Think about all of the insurance premiums in Eve. They're huge to say the least. Now think of Ebank that has (I think) about 1 Trillion ISK worth of investments, and it's screwed up bad. It's being fixed, but the more ISK that a company fund contains, the greater the risk of someone will scam it (or a portion of it).
Insurance is way too big for a player run system to function effectively. Ebank was able to halt interest payouts and freeze deposits due to the nature of the business they were in. Insurance payouts can't be stalled. So this system will most likely only be effective through an in game UI.
|
Alice Celadon
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 04:42:00 -
[14]
It's pretty cool how at post eleven in this thread, the premise that insurance is an ISK Faucet gets shunned in favor of the opposite. It's almost like it may have been settled by a dev blog with actual data, and one of the two groups of posters is talking out of their puffholes.
|
Diomedes Calypso
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 04:51:00 -
[15]
Btw, I just took the time to browse what I think are all the blog posts referred to in the eve information portal on the forums (I'd figure that I can get all I need to know about updates there?) and I still couldn't find stuff about goods currently made by npc's which will be made by players with the next release (or future releases for that matter)
Would you mind posting me a link to those things and clue me in about where i should be looking instead?
(if i missed it a 12th time , while looking specificaly for it I'll eat my hat)
|
Alice Celadon
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 04:57:00 -
[16]
http://www.eve-search.com/thread/1279406/page/1
That has the best links and prior discussion.
|
Diomedes Calypso
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 05:14:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Alice Celadon It's pretty cool how at post eleven in this thread, the premise that insurance is an ISK Faucet gets shunned in favor of the opposite. It's almost like it may have been settled by a dev blog with actual data, and one of the two groups of posters is talking out of their puffholes.
I noticed that too but I don't have the energy to take on the complete unknown about how many players that aren't consumed with making isk buy insurance and don't care to do the sesible thing and blow it up for money (or to be fair, leave the ship scattered where they can't). Or how big an isk sink players retiring with isk in their accounts is (huge I'm sure). And how those compare in size to the IED
Thats all about isk sinks which is an interesting thing that I'd like to start in a new thread but I'll wait a day for.
I do know that insurance has been a faucet into the pockets of ore miners and that portion of the plumbing is turning off.
|
Rodarine
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 05:36:00 -
[18]
it isnt really an ISK faucet. it is more an ISK laundering scheme. IER "frauders" take the minerals out of the system, 'wash them" and get ISK back instead of minerals. They just happen (when prices are low enough) get more ISK back than what they spend.
basically those guys are trading out minerals for ISK. So it is an NPC supported system. Not really NPPC based. It isnt even a static one. At least in terms of mineral per mineral prices. The only thing builders have to do is get the ore cheaper in total than what it takes to build the ship. So there are countless ways and prices for minerals individually for this to work, and that is why it has.
These guys arent getting rich, i said that before. Although now they can again since the mineral prices have tanked and the profit per Rokh (IER of choice for many)is over 5.5 milliion per ship now. But if trit were trading at 3.0 and pyer stayed steady at 7.5, and mex stayed at 30 then the profits would be soaked up pretty fast and these guys would have to really watch Iso, Nox, zyd, and mega prices to get their profits from. But with trit at 2.7 and Pyer at 6.9 that means they can even afford to pay 1400 for Zyd and 2500 for mega and still make over 5 million per ship.
Its a balancing act. But right now it is one in a 'swimming pool'. Where the mineral prices equal the water so the prices can vary greatly but as long as all together they are less than what it takes to fill the pool they can get alittle profit ot of frauding insurance.
So I asked the question before, if the minerals leave the system and are replaced by a KNOWN ISK number what harm is that? Ore and minerals are respawned daily so there has to be a constant sink for them somewhere or t will be saturation pretty quickly. IER served the purpose of all that without getting the whole NPC valueing of specific minerals involved. And it helped stablize the market.
The worst thing is that people actually think an economy will work that is totally supported by the playerbase, and that just isnt possible, especially in a game like this where so many base materials are added into the system on a daily basis.
I give it 2 weeks before the speculators are broke and the markets are buried with stuff that wont or cant sell at any price because their isnt enough money moving in the system to make it work. Unless of course they put in a plan that is different than any of the blogs I have read. But as written I foresse a massive failure in the economy. call it deflation call it whatever you want. The only way to gain ISK will be from the missions which are WHOLLY NPC. And I am sure mission runners dont spend too much money on anything other than Ammo.
|
Alice Celadon
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 05:40:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Rodarine it isnt really an ISK faucet. it is more an ISK laundering scheme. IER "frauders" take the minerals out of the system, 'wash them" and get ISK back instead of minerals. They just happen (when prices are low enough) get more ISK back than what they spend.
basically those guys are trading out minerals for ISK. So it is an NPC supported system. Not really NPPC based. It isnt even a static one. At least in terms of mineral per mineral prices. The only thing builders have to do is get the ore cheaper in total than what it takes to build the ship. So there are countless ways and prices for minerals individually for this to work, and that is why it has.
These guys arent getting rich, i said that before. Although now they can again since the mineral prices have tanked and the profit per Rokh (IER of choice for many)is over 5.5 milliion per ship now. But if trit were trading at 3.0 and pyer stayed steady at 7.5, and mex stayed at 30 then the profits would be soaked up pretty fast and these guys would have to really watch Iso, Nox, zyd, and mega prices to get their profits from. But with trit at 2.7 and Pyer at 6.9 that means they can even afford to pay 1400 for Zyd and 2500 for mega and still make over 5 million per ship.
Its a balancing act. But right now it is one in a 'swimming pool'. Where the mineral prices equal the water so the prices can vary greatly but as long as all together they are less than what it takes to fill the pool they can get alittle profit ot of frauding insurance.
So I asked the question before, if the minerals leave the system and are replaced by a KNOWN ISK number what harm is that? Ore and minerals are respawned daily so there has to be a constant sink for them somewhere or t will be saturation pretty quickly. IER served the purpose of all that without getting the whole NPC valueing of specific minerals involved. And it helped stablize the market.
The worst thing is that people actually think an economy will work that is totally supported by the playerbase, and that just isnt possible, especially in a game like this where so many base materials are added into the system on a daily basis.
I give it 2 weeks before the speculators are broke and the markets are buried with stuff that wont or cant sell at any price because their isnt enough money moving in the system to make it work. Unless of course they put in a plan that is different than any of the blogs I have read. But as written I foresse a massive failure in the economy. call it deflation call it whatever you want. The only way to gain ISK will be from the missions which are WHOLLY NPC. And I am sure mission runners dont spend too much money on anything other than Ammo.
EPIC FACEPALM.
|
Rico Lobo
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 05:56:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Rodarine . . .
ok short version
Even without the insurance fraud Insurance is an ISK faucet into the game. period. Yes it acts like a Mineral Sink in the game but to be blunt anymore SO WHAT!
you get cash every time a ship goes boom,. heck you dont even have to realy do anything and BOOM you get cash.
Lets face it theres been deflationary presure on Items in this game ever since the first moron decided that the minerals they mine are free. Sooner or later the developers will have to decide which is the lesser evil. price props or ships whos sale price bairly pays for the factory slots. (if that)
|
|
Ran Khanon
Amarr Vengeance Innovations
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 07:00:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Diomedes Calypso
What I do not follow are your comments of how a switch to T2 production could counter the deflationary pressure from closing a faucet. That would not increase ISK flow into the game (although it is an example of deflationary pressures spreading from one market to another as market forces level out profitablity per player time hour of activities)
Yeah you are right. I meant to say that insurance fraudsters, keeping their industry running but switching to other production niches instead of radically switching their game play style to missioning will work as a break on any mineral price deflation because demand won't be dampened all that much (also: less minerals from missions lowering the supply). This means miners won't get such a short end of the stick as they might think.
There WILL be less isk created into the game because of insurance fraud not working anymore yet there is still a tremendous amount of isk generated by missioners and rat bounties in general and I would really love some insight in how those numbers compare. All I know is that there are huge numbers of people running missions and complexes and belt ratting every day and I think the insurance fraud faucet bleaks in comparison.
Also like the poster above me remarked: isk is created every time an insured ship goes boom and more people will be tempted to insure T2 and T3 ships as those payouts will increase.
Actually the only worry one should have is insurance fraudsters switching to other production niches and selling their stuff to players along with the current offerers; this could deflate prices of popular t2/t3/pos money spinners quite a bit. There should be an increased demand on BPO's to reflect this. Help us to make parrots game related today! |
Di Mulle
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 09:22:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Alice Celadon
Inflationary forces in Tyrannis
Blueprints. Control Towers. Skillbooks. <--!!!!
All of these things could go player-seeded overnight. That means a gigantic amount of isk stays in circulation.
Why you are so certain this stuff will be player-produced ? Nobody can say for sure ofc, but I pretty much doubt about BPO's and skillbooks. Control towers, don't know, but my gut feeling would be no. Implants, pretty much yes.
|
Alice Celadon
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 09:40:00 -
[23]
oh yes implants yes.
|
Rico Lobo
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 18:40:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Di Mulle
Originally by: Alice Celadon
Inflationary forces in Tyrannis
Blueprints. Control Towers. Skillbooks. <--!!!!
All of these things could go player-seeded overnight. That means a gigantic amount of isk stays in circulation.
Why you are so certain this stuff will be player-produced ? Nobody can say for sure ofc, but I pretty much doubt about BPO's and skillbooks. Control towers, don't know, but my gut feeling would be no. Implants, pretty much yes.
There was a coment a while ago about skillbooks and BPs being "produced" by players, the BPs would make the new stuff for and from PI and the skillbooks would be loot/salvageed from sights and or loyalty rewards. I think someone else also made a sudgestion that RP be used to "buy" baseline BPOs but that was over a year ago.
|
Drachiel
Caldari Mercury LLC
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 18:59:00 -
[25]
Wouldn't deflation help all of us as long as we, the economically advantaged, liquidate before Tyrannis hits? We could re-buy all of our assets after the initial shock when prices are their lowest.
I will have your stuff. |
Leon Laroux
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 20:55:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Alice Celadon oh yes implants yes.
If implants can be player-made, that'll really punch mission-runners in the balls, as they're a crucial way to profit from LP. Right now, they also work as an ISK sink (since you pay ISK+LP to buy them from LP stores). Pretty much all the money from agent rewards goes right back into the LP Store. Since the market for implants is much larger than the market for faction modules, I don't really see CCP taking that away from missioners.
|
Alice Celadon
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 21:04:00 -
[27]
Yeah. That post was very sarcastic. I was pointing out how arbitrary the previous poster was being in pronouncing which npc goods will go to player production. For the exact reasons you outline (implants are already player produced for the most part) I highly doubt CCP would change them. It would have no affect on the greater scheme they're trying to enact.
I might post a thread explaining how CCP is trying to radically change the EVE landscape with planetary interaction, but frankly I'm beginning to believe that the old guard of EVE is too creaky to get it and no one new on the scene is smart enough.
|
Breaker77
Gallente Reclamation Industries
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 22:22:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Alice Celadon Yeah. That post was very sarcastic. I was pointing out how arbitrary the previous poster was being in pronouncing which npc goods will go to player production. For the exact reasons you outline (implants are already player produced for the most part) I highly doubt CCP would change them. It would have no affect on the greater scheme they're trying to enact.
Except that CCP has posted on the forums that they want Skillbooks and current NPC sold items to be player made!!
I've been searching for that post, but when you type in anything with skillbook or skill in eve search you get a million results all unrelated
|
Kesserine
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 22:33:00 -
[29]
Does MD believe that meta 3-4 items may be included in Tyrannis? The high price differential for these items compared to player manufactured T1 and T2 strikes me as a potential target for deliberate deflation.
|
Hexxx
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 23:08:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Packtu'sa
Originally by: Forum Dweller Ta-da, no more ISK sink related to insurance. Discuss
The real solution is player-run insurance. It won't happen yet, since nobody's developed it enough to start accepting premiums. To a certain degree, player-run insurance will only shine once CCP removes its (cheating) competition, but we'll see what role insurance plays once its prices are more dynamic.
Apologies for the thread derail.
Yet.
http://www.eve-insurance.net/
Projects Blog |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |