EVE Search - Hey CCP, what kind of isk sink are you currently planning?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Hey CCP, what kind of isk sink are you currently planning?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Useful Alt	Posted - 2010.04.21 22:54:00 - [1] just asking... you know... too much isk in game... need a big sink
Ghoest	Posted - 2010.04.21 23:21:00 - [2] Edited by: Ghoest on 21/04/2010 23:23:58 You can make untold fortunes in EVE safely with a faction ship running T2 mods. There is no way sink that. The real reason there is no real sink for isk producers is that low sec and 0.0 are too dangerous for the average player to be able to make money in(with the exception of alliance members.) This led to a focus on playing high sec only and with time as players optomised it we ended up with the current mess. Wherever you went - Here you are.
Abrazzar	Posted - 2010.04.22 08:02:00 - [3] I humbly offer myself as your personal ISK sink. Send your ISK to me and I promise, you will never have to look at it again. --------
Zartrader	Posted - 2010.04.22 08:15:00 - [4] Edited by: Zartrader on 22/04/2010 08:18:46 We need an ISK tap actually, in fact lots of them to stop one unbalancing the game as Insurance has . Deflation is coming up probably which will compensate MR's for the Meta 0 drop nerf. This game needs a lot more mineral sinks too. So please pass any minerals to me, I thank you.
noname male	Posted - 2010.04.22 08:27:00 - [5] how about buying sp as a isk sink. 1b isk gets you 30 days at an average of say, 45k sp a day, or 1.26m sp per 28 days. yes I know its open for abuse with players buying gtc's and skilling up.
Tippia Reikoku IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.04.22 08:31:00 - [6] PI? ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki
eliminator2 Gallente	Posted - 2010.04.22 08:34:00 - [7] Originally by: noname male how about buying sp as a isk sink. 1b isk gets you 30 days at an average of say, 45k sp a day, or 1.26m sp per 28 days. yes I know its open for abuse with players buying gtc's and skilling up. no its been suggested before and 90% of pple said no its not fair on older players tht have worked years on there sp for some noob to get loads of isk and catch em up :p ----------------------------------------------- I met Eliminator1..... I chewed it up, and spat it out. Now, he is my minion. I kill miners and mission runners people say, I call them target pra
Zartrader	Posted - 2010.04.22 08:35:00 - [8] Edited by: Zartrader on 22/04/2010 08:35:40 Originally by: noname male how about buying sp as a isk sink. 1b isk gets you 30 days at an average of say, 45k sp a day, or 1.26m sp per 28 days. yes I know its open for abuse with players buying gtc's and skilling up. This has been suggested in the past and the fact you can buy characters effectively does the same thing. The problem is it breaks the core principle that you should not be able to grind levels in this game so I think it's not a good idea. It would **** a LOT of players off too. It would cheapen the character progress and lead to what happens in other games, characters with a ton of gear and with all the skills but useless gamers.
Chi Quan Bibkor Enterprises	Posted - 2010.04.22 08:39:00 - [9] May 18th, Tyranis ---- Ceterum censeo blasters need some tracking love
Teinyhr Minmatar Nor'akho Matar	Posted - 2010.04.22 14:10:00 - [10] Originally by: Abrazzar I humbly offer myself as your personal ISK sink. Send your ISK to me and I promise, you will never have to look at it again. Me too. Send me all your extra ISK and I'll make sure you won't see it ever again. As an added bonus my alt will give your toon a lapdance once Incarna hits. Donate now! ------------------- This is Sig. Launch every Sig. For Great Justice.

Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2010.04.22 14:14:00 - [11] Originally by: Teinyhr toon - Did this sig become irrelevant while I was gone? Let me know!
Teinyhr Minmatar Nor'akho Matar	Posted - 2010.04.22 14:24:00 - [12] Originally by: Crumplecorn They are toons. Someone using desu on their signature has no place on complaining about that. ------------------- This is Sig. Launch every Sig. For Great Justice.
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2010.04.22 14:27:00 - [13] Originally by: Teinyhr They are toons. Someone using desu on their signature has no place on complaining about that. Actually having these signatures makes me a qualified expert in the field of cel-shading recognition. - Did this sig become irrelevant while I was gone? Let me know!
Ninetails o'Cat League of Super Evil	Posted - 2010.04.22 15:23:00 - [14] Originally by: Teinyhr Originally by: Crumplecorn They are toons. Someone using desu on their signature has no place on complaining about that. You did not just insult the Crumplecorn! Monkeys, attack!
Deus Ex'Machina The-Machine	Posted - 2010.04.22 15:38:00 - [15] Originally by: Ninetails o'Cat Originally by: Teinyhr Originally by: Crumplecorn They are toons. Someone using desu on their signature has no place on complaining about that. You did not just insult the Crumplecorn! Monkeys, attack! Maybe he deserves it for being a hypocrite ? Cat on Acid - Arkanon: EXPLAIN YOURSELF, EVILDOER! Sharkbait: Dude.
Ninetails o'Cat League of Super Evil	Posted - 2010.04.22 15:44:00 - [16] Originally by: Deus Ex'Machina Originally by: Ninetails o'Cat Originally by: Teinyhr Originally by: Crumplecorn They are toons. Someone using desu on their signature has no place on complaining about that. You did not just insult the Crumplecorn! Monkeys, attack! Maybe he deserves it for being a hypocrite ? Cat on Acid No offence to you personally, but in my opinion that's just unbelievably cruel to that cat. Oh, and again, you don't mess with Crumplecorn. Crumplecorn > you.
Deus Ex'Machina The-Machine	Posted - 2010.04.22 15:46:00 - [17] Originally by: Ninetails o'Cat No offence to you personally, but in my opinion that's just unbelievably cruel to that cat. Oh, and again, you don't mess with Crumplecorn. Crumplecorn > you. But I like watching cats humiliate themselves. - Arkanon: EXPLAIN YOURSELF, EVILDOER! Sharkbait: Dude.

CCP Adida	Posted - 2010.04.22 15:51:00 - [18] Removed off topic discussions. Adida Community Rep CCP Hf, EVE Online

Soulita Gallente Inner Core	Posted - 2010.04.22 16:51:00 - [19] Originally by: Tippia PI? With potential wages for planetary workers?
UVPhoenix2 Gallente Brotherhood of Heart and Steel Iron Heart Brotherhood	Posted - 2010.04.22 17:01:00 - [20] Just make all the asteroid belts disappear for a few hours that should do it. I know how you feel. Material of this nature affect us all in different ways. What you need to do is learn from this. And this is just my sig.

Skex Relbore	Posted - 2010.04.22 17:19:00 - [21] Edited by: Skex Relbore on 22/04/2010 17:19:53 This again? There is no inflation in the EVE economy. There is no excess supply of ISK. There for there is no need for more isk sinks. In fact we really need either more ISK faucets or more material sinks. Why? Because currency is a representation of the total productivity of an economy. To make it real simple assume that an economy has 100 units of resources if there were 100 units of currency each unit of currency would be worth 1 unit of resources. Now inflation is what happens when you increase the amount of currency relative to the resources that currency represents. So say in our theoretical economy if one were to have a fixed amount of resources and doubled the number of units of currency each unit of currency would only be worth half a unit of resources so it would take more units of currency to buy a given resource. The opposite deflation is what happens when the reverse occurs and you have an increase in resources with no corresponding increase in units of currency so back to our simplified model if you kept 100 units of currency and doubled the productivity each unit of currency would now be able to "buy" 2 units of resources. If there is a balance at the rate of currency injection and resource growth then you have a stable economy. So lets look at the Eve economy and how it measures up to this basic understanding of how currency works. Are the sticker prices of materials going up? No they aren't in fact save for in some specific instances where there are other economic factors involved prices are remaining steady or actually declining. In fact if you look at the most fungible assets minerals pretty much the only thing holding the price from free fall is the floor provided by insurance fraud. This is caused by a combination of too much new material entering the game relative to that which is destroyed and a rate of currency injection that is insufficient to cover the new materials. More ISK sinks would only serve to exacerbate this problem by reducing the total amount of isk even more meaning that the buying power of the existing isk would be even further increased. Now this would work quite well for those who have a lot of liquid isk but would pretty much screw everyone who are either just starting out, poor, or had most their isk tied up in assets. Increasing isk sinks is a horrible idea and would have many negative repercussion on the game. Once again repeat after me. There is no inflation in EVE.
Diomedes Calypso	Posted - 2010.04.22 19:25:00 - [22] I don't get it.. there's no need for an isk sink unless you don't pvp and play to grind up piles of isk. People who pvp have limitless sinks of assets... true they're blowing up ore and modules transfering their isk to those who see their "score" in the sandbox by isk in the bank. If there were Inflation where the prices of items kept rising I might agree with you but there hasn't been.. actualy there has been more situational deflation if anything..showing that consumers aren't ripe in isk. I heard someone suggest NPC's selling boutique "care bear" shaped drones at outrageous prices. Or maybe they can sell 100 billion isk space castles with npc furniture items from club penquin so that those who like grind isk have a way to spend it on other sorts of "riches" to hoard.
Tom Peeping	Posted - 2010.04.22 20:32:00 - [23] Originally by: Skex Relbore Edited by: Skex Relbore on 22/04/2010 17:19:53 This again? There is no inflation in the EVE economy. .... Once again repeat after me. There is no inflation in EVE. Soooooo um, you're trying to claim there is currently no way to "add" isk to the game relative to the resources in action at any given moment? No offense man, but I don't think you've thought that through well enough yet. There IS inflation in eve. I'm not arguing whether we are currently in an inflationary cycle or not, but inflation does occur in eve. The fact that an arbitrary price or two has not altered does not change the fact. That only indicates that the isk is being taken up by other methodologies. For a real life example, look at the current US economy. Supply of money has increased, yet prices of consumables have not always increased proportionately. The reason there is not that resource growth has grown comparably, but that the money is going to other things which limits it's availability in general circulation, masking the inflation... in the case of the US, the cost that is rising which is keeping other elements from going up, is the price of governance. I'm not trying to argue whether there is currently a problem in game or not with the eve economy. I've not paid enough attention to the overall state of the economy in game, to be able to discuss that intelligently. I'm only taking issue with the single comment that there is no inflation in eve, as there are very definitely differences in the rates and methods at which isk and resources are added into the game, which by definition means there are imbalances. Heck, CCP is making minor unannounced modifications all the time to keep some elements of control. Any one who tracks loot drops over a long period of time, will recognize statistically significant changes occurring from time.
Teinyhr Minmatar Nor'akho Matar	Posted - 2010.04.22 20:45:00 - [24] Originally by: Ninetails o'Cat You did not just insult the Crumplecorn! Removed off topic link - Adida I wasn't aware I can't state my opinion. Allow me to dredge some care from give-a-****-bay. ------------------- This is Sig. Launch every Sig. For Great Justice.
Space Pinata Amarr Discount Napkin Industries	Posted - 2010.04.22 21:05:00 - [25] Protip: In an 'inflating' economy, making money is easy, everyone has more, everyone spends more, everyone is wealthier.. etc etc. In a 'deflating' economy, making money becomes painful, everything dries up, etc etc... Everyone being 'richer' leads to a more enjoyable game for all involved.
Skex Relbore	Posted - 2010.04.22 21:07:00 - [26] I did not say that Inflation wasn't possible in EVE I said there is no inflation in EVE. Truth is I'm not certain it's even possible short of major changes in the mechanics for there to actually be inflation in EVE. The primary ISK faucet in the game are mission rewards and bounties. OF course these are also activities that generate a substantial amount of materials entering the game as well in the form of T1 loot and drone goo. Of course the OP's premise is that there is too much isk in the game. He doesn't explain why he thinks there is too much so I am working under the assumption that he's like just another of the endless parade of people who don't understand economics who continually make the claim that because so much isk is coming into the game that we're seeing inflation. I simply explained how one can tell quickly and easily that such is not the case. The real world economy is much more complex and there are any number of factors that distort the value of currency mostly the private banking system that works very hard to protect existing wealth and hyper accumulation of wealth into the hands of those being protected. EVE's economy is much simpler with fewer entrenched interests. Because the mechanism that introduces new isk into the game is so diluted (I'm trying to think of the best word but it escapes me) in that it's spread out accross thousands of mission runners many of whom aren't all that cash rich (face it the real cash rich are traders who don't actually generate new isk) This means that the EVE economy avoids the major failure of the real world economy where any new currency is already owned by those who have capital. Further since resources in this game are limited only by the number of people out generating them and in general have very low operating costs involved in generating them compared to the real world means the growth of the EVE economy is massive. You only get inflation when your money supply increases faster than your economy grows. And I frankly don't see how that is even possible in EVE unless every player decided tomorrow to stop PVPing and mining and trading and did nothing but spend every day running missions. But many people don't like running missions and simply won't run them particularly when they can earn greater "isk" by other activities. Even of those who do run missions many run them only to finance other activities. Oh and remember those long threads about how much money L4 mission runners made? Even the top mission runners were only generating about 20 million new isk per hour the bulk of income reported was on trade earnings through selling either minerals, salvage or LP store items all of which are isk sinks since each step in the transactions sucks a bit of the isk out of the economy through either taxes, fees or isk cost of the LP items. So I stand by my clain that there is no inflation in EVE further short of major changes in the mechanics I don't see that it's even possible. Hell even if they go through with that economic disaster of a plan to nerf insurance payouts and lower the amount of T1 loot to reprocess I still don't think it could happen because Mining is just too damned easy to Macro and the perception of less income for mission runners will result in even more risk adverse behaviors resulting in fewer ship destructions(Which is pretty much the only way materials ever leave the damned economy)
Zartrader	Posted - 2010.04.22 21:29:00 - [27] Edited by: Zartrader on 22/04/2010 21:32:05 The issue at the moment is we currently have deflation, which will increase after the next patch, and too many minerals, which may or may not be changed in the next patch according to how effective the changes are. In any event an issue in EVE is we have too few methods of mineral and ISK flows. So a small change can affect the market disproportionately. There is little diversity in EVE. Balance is achieved by having viable alternatives for players. So if one area suffers from deflation the other area is used instead as its more attractive, making a natural balancing mechanic. At the moment mission runners mission run and miners mine and that's that. Those groups have no real choices to get what they want. Real world economies benefit greatly from low barriers to entry for any activity and a flexible work force, all basic economics. EVE does not have this at all and except maybe for PI does not seem that concerned about it. It's one of the reason I think when CCP compare EVE economics to the real world it's completely wrong. Any comparisons are at best superficial. There is also no real taxation, no imports or exports (closed economy) and certainly not the vast diversity needed for a vibrant and working economy.
Sig Sour	Posted - 2010.04.22 22:43:00 - [28] They will be charging isk to talk in local and to post on the forums. 10k per character in local. 5 mil to start a thread on the forums, 1 mil to reply to a thread.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2010.04.23 01:21:00 - [29] Originally by: Skex Relbore Edited by: Skex Relbore on 22/04/2010 17:19:53 This again? There is no inflation in the EVE economy. There is no excess supply of ISK. There for there is no need for more isk sinks. In fact we really need either more ISK faucets or more material sinks. Why? Because currency is a representation of the total productivity of an economy. To make it real simple assume that an economy has 100 units of resources if there were 100 units of currency each unit of currency would be worth 1 unit of resources. Now inflation is what happens when you increase the amount of currency relative to the resources that currency represents. So say in our theoretical economy if one were to have a fixed amount of resources and doubled the number of units of currency each unit of currency would only be worth half a unit of resources so it would take more units of currency to buy a given resource. The opposite deflation is what happens when the reverse occurs and you have an increase in resources with no corresponding increase in units of currency so back to our simplified model if you kept 100 units of currency and doubled the productivity each unit of currency would now be able to "buy" 2 units of resources. If there is a balance at the rate of currency injection and resource growth then you have a stable economy. So lets look at the Eve economy and how it measures up to this basic understanding of how currency works. Are the sticker prices of materials going up? No they aren't in fact save for in some specific instances where there are other economic factors involved prices are remaining steady or actually declining. In fact if you look at the most fungible assets minerals pretty much the only thing holding the price from free fall is the floor provided by insurance fraud. This is caused by a combination of too much new material entering the game relative to that which is destroyed and a rate of currency injection that is insufficient to cover the new materials. More ISK sinks would only serve to exacerbate this problem by reducing the total amount of isk even more meaning that the buying power of the existing isk would be even further increased. Now this would work quite well for those who have a lot of liquid isk but would pretty much screw everyone who are either just starting out, poor, or had most their isk tied up in assets. Increasing isk sinks is a horrible idea and would have many negative repercussion on the game. Once again repeat after me. There is no inflation in EVE. LOL. You're wrong. - Originally by: Bellum Eternus That is the beauty of Eve, it's a crucible in which great minds are formed and the rest are ground to dust. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
FunzzeR Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2010.04.23 02:16:00 - [30] Edited by: FunzzeR on 23/04/2010 02:17:58 Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Skex Relbore Edited by: Skex Relbore on 22/04/2010 17:19:53 This again? There is no inflation in the EVE economy. There is no excess supply of ISK. There for there is no need for more isk sinks. In fact we really need either more ISK faucets or more material sinks. Why? Because currency is a representation of the total productivity of an economy. To make it real simple assume that an economy has 100 units of resources if there were 100 units of currency each unit of currency would be worth 1 unit of resources. Now inflation is what happens when you increase the amount of currency relative to the resources that currency represents. So say in our theoretical economy if one were to have a fixed amount of resources and doubled the number of units of currency each unit of currency would only be worth half a unit of resources so it would take more units of currency to buy a given resource. The opposite deflation is what happens when the reverse occurs and you have an increase in resources with no corresponding increase in units of currency so back to our simplified model if you kept 100 units of currency and doubled the productivity each unit of currency would now be able to "buy" 2 units of resources. If there is a balance at the rate of currency injection and resource growth then you have a stable economy. So lets look at the Eve economy and how it measures up to this basic understanding of how currency works. Are the sticker prices of materials going up? No they aren't in fact save for in some specific instances where there are other economic factors involved prices are remaining steady or actually declining. In fact if you look at the most fungible assets minerals pretty much the only thing holding the price from free fall is the floor provided by insurance fraud. This is caused by a combination of too much new material entering the game relative to that which is destroyed and a rate of currency injection that is insufficient to cover the new materials. More ISK sinks would only serve to exacerbate this problem by reducing the total amount of isk even more meaning that the buying power of the existing isk would be even further increased. Now this would work quite well for those who have a lot of liquid isk but would pretty much screw everyone who are either just starting out, poor, or had most their isk tied up in assets. Increasing isk sinks is a horrible idea and would have many negative repercussion on the game. Once again repeat after me. There is no inflation in EVE. LOL. You're wrong. Confirming Bellum Eternus knows more about economics than 97% of the EVE population. And Skex good sir, please take a few upper division courses in macroeconomics and revisit your statement please.... PRAISE THE SCOTTISH FOLD!! THEIR WILL SHALL BE DONE!!

Jerid Verges Gallente The Society of Innovation The Last Stand	Posted - 2010.04.23 03:14:00 - [31] 2x increase in production costs should do it :D
Neesa Corrinne Stimulus Rote Kapelle	Posted - 2010.04.23 04:05:00 - [32] Originally by: Ninetails o'Cat Originally by: Teinyhr Originally by: Crumplecorn They are toons. Someone using desu on their signature has no place on complaining about that. You did not just insult the Crumplecorn! Why not? Ever since he came back, four out of every five posts he makes is designed to insult either the OP or someone else in the thread. I'd say all is fair when it comes to someone who treats the community like that. As far as the ISK sink goes, there really isn't a big enough ISK sink in the game, and there never can be. Titans were supposed to be ultimate ISK sink in the game when they were introduced. The way CCP talked about them, they were going to be so expensive that only a major alliance would be able to own one, and even then they would probably only be able to own one or two at the most. Of course now we see the fallacy of that idea because there are alliances that have dozens of the things now and are still building more. What CCP forgot to add to Titans was Upkeep Costs. Owning something that ridiculously large and destructive should have come with a monthly upkeep cost of somewhere around 20% of the original cost just to keep it functional. Players will find a way to build, buy or steal anything in the game that is a one shot payment, add an upkeep cost to it, however, and suddenly it becomes a real ISK sink instead of just a purchase.
failpirate	Posted - 2010.04.23 04:19:00 - [33] forget isk sinks; we need more time sinks. it should take longer to do stuff in eve.
Driven Marcelli Minmatar Evil Overhead	Posted - 2010.04.23 05:32:00 - [34] Originally by: failpirate forget isk sinks; we need more time sinks. it should take longer to do stuff in eve. Play PI on Sisi. honestly its the worst freaking timesink around
Skex Relbore	Posted - 2010.04.23 06:28:00 - [35] Edited by: Skex Relbore on 23/04/2010 06:29:09 Originally by: FunzzeR Edited by: FunzzeR on 23/04/2010 02:17:58 Confirming Bellum Eternus knows more about economics than 97% of the EVE population. And Skex good sir, please take a few upper division courses in macroeconomics and revisit your statement please.... Bellum is the most consistently wrong person I've seen on this board to date. I've explained in the most simplified a manner I can come up with why the evidence at hand does no support the premise that there is inflation in EVE. You can claim I'm wrong til you're blue in the face but until you provide an actual argument beyond "I'm right your wrong so there" You're just blowing smoke out your ass. If there was inflation in EVE you would see prices increasing in general across the board the item that cost 50 million is 6 months ago would cost 60 million today. But that isn't what we're seeing prices have remained stable at a very low rate for at least 6 months now, save for some specific examples in the T2 market which had major mechanic changes which resulted in it's atypical behavior relative to the rest of the economy. Inflation is quite literally a decrease in the buying power of a given unit of currency. But if anything the buying power of ISK in the game has increased not decreased. I suggest in the future before telling someone else to educate themselves you make sure you know what the #($ you're talking about first.
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2010.04.23 07:48:00 - [36] Originally by: Neesa Corrinne Ever since he came back, four out of every five posts he makes is designed to insult either the OP or someone else in the thread. Love you too <3 - Did this sig become irrelevant while I was gone? Let me know!
Tobias Xiaosen Total Xenophobia Elysium Alliance	Posted - 2010.04.23 08:01:00 - [37] Funzzer, baring some of the insults thrown at you by Skex, would you care to elaborate on the macroeconomic principles you are reffering to? I currently am partly studying economics myself (though by no means am I a good grades student) and from what Skex has thus far said on the subject in regards to EVE I agree with. In fact I was even thinking of starting a thread of my own based around the ideas he is developing. So naturally I'm curious about the ideas you vaguely mentioned. Don't take this as an attack Funzzer, I just have an academic curiousity and due to my personal failings in the subject of economics, I have no doubt that there are plenty of ideas that I have a limited understanding of. So if you wouldn't mind could you please share? ~
Cpt Branko Retired Pirate Club	Posted - 2010.04.23 08:57:00 - [38] This thread is silly. IF there was inflation in EVE, then we would see actual inflation - you would be able to buy less with the same amount of ISK then you could, say, a month ago. As this is not the case, claiming that we have inflation is silly. You have to understand that items do not deteriorate in EVE, and they are only removed from the economy when they are destroyed. Provided there is a ever-increasing supply of items (a reasonable proposition) the supply of cash has to increase to prevent a deflationary effect from happening, although actual mechanisms to prevent deflation in EVE (at least when we consider mineral prices) exist due to insurance (enabling a direct conversion from ISK to minerals). Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Teinyhr Minmatar Nor'akho Matar	Posted - 2010.04.23 09:18:00 - [39] Edited by: Teinyhr on 23/04/2010 09:18:22 Originally by: failpirate forget isk sinks; we need more time sinks. it should take longer to do stuff in eve. Somehow this reminded me of this lovely picture: http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/940/hardcoregamers.gif ------------------- This is Sig. Launch every Sig. For Great Justice.
Kendon Riddick	Posted - 2010.04.23 09:22:00 - [40] Originally by: failpirate forget isk sinks; we need more time sinks. it should take longer to do stuff in eve. please stop what you are doing, its making my panda sad.

M'ktakh	Posted - 2010.04.23 10:40:00 - [41] Is there currently more ISK injected into the EVE universe than it is removed? If yes, we have inflation, its that simple. Yes, one may want to correct this for "hoarding", but infaltion, is, in its most base definition, the process where the supply of money (ISK), outgrows the supply of things that cost money (goods).
Zeredek Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2010.04.23 11:25:00 - [42] Originally by: Teinyhr Originally by: Crumplecorn They are toons. Someone using desu on their signature has no place on complaining about that. Oh, burned! Originally by: CCP Chronotis whiners
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2010.04.23 11:35:00 - [43] Originally by: Zeredek Oh, burned! Hardly. - Did this sig become irrelevant while I was gone? Let me know!
TII Noob Minmatar Vodka Corp	Posted - 2010.04.23 12:12:00 - [44] http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=toon I like Number 1 Hi
Teinyhr Minmatar Nor'akho Matar	Posted - 2010.04.23 12:19:00 - [45] @ above discussion: http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/7888/roomfull.jpg ------------------- This is Sig. Launch every Sig. For Great Justice.
Skex Relbore	Posted - 2010.04.23 14:07:00 - [46] Originally by: M'ktakh Is there currently more ISK injected into the EVE universe than it is removed? If yes, we have inflation, its that simple. Yes, one may want to correct this for "hoarding", but infaltion, is, in its most base definition, the process where the supply of money (ISK), outgrows the supply of things that cost money (goods). No it's not. Read my early post read Cpt Branco's even more concise explanation. If we had a fixed resource base you would be correct however we do not have a fixed resource base. In fact we have an ever expanding resource base. So isk has to be continually injected to account for that growth. There are 4 main factors that determine whether your currency is inflating, deflating or stable in EVE. Material faucets read loot, minerals, moon goo any non-ISK rewards for any activity in the game that has an isk value. Material sinks the rate at which those mentioned items are removed from the game(exploding ships). Isk faucets, Mission rewards, bouties, insurance, NPC buy orders. and finally ISK sinks, Taxes, fee's, insurance premiums, SOV, LP Store. If materials enter the economy at a rate greater than they leave and all other factors remain constant you will see an increase in the buying power of ISK. Meaning things get cheaper overall as a given isk is "worth" more. If all other factors remained constant but the rate materials left the economy increased you would then have inflation in that the same isk would now represent less material and prices would rise. Once again variables constant save for an increase in ISK sinks and you get the same effect as an increase in material faucets as each individual isks buying power is increased. And finally if all the variables remained constant but the ISK faucet was increased then you would have inflation and each isks buying power would be reduced leading to a increase in the isk costs of materials. Now it gets complicated because you've got numerous sinks and faucets in this game and tweaks on anyone can cause shifts in the others. But the one thing should be apparent to anyone who's taken Macro-economics 101 is that the actual evidence in the markets does not support the premise that there is Inflation in EVE. Further that the suggestions to fix the "problem" coming from the "there's inflation in EVE" crowd would actually exacerbate the current situation further driving down the price of everything and increasing the value of existing isk even more. The truth is we really need more isk faucets. This game could use a little inflation, A little inflation is actually good for an economy particularly in a game where the primary goal is to have fun by blowing each others spaceships up.
FunzzeR Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2010.04.23 14:34:00 - [47] Originally by: Tobias Xiaosen Funzzer, baring some of the insults thrown at you by Skex, would you care to elaborate on the macroeconomic principles you are reffering to? I currently am partly studying economics myself (though by no means am I a good grades student) and from what Skex has thus far said on the subject in regards to EVE I agree with. In fact I was even thinking of starting a thread of my own based around the ideas he is developing. So naturally I'm curious about the ideas you vaguely mentioned. Don't take this as an attack Funzzer, I just have an academic curiousity and due to my personal failings in the subject of economics, I have no doubt that there are plenty of ideas that I have a limited understanding of. So if you wouldn't mind could you please share? Several things to note that point the way to inflation or explaining the apparent lack thereof: Have a look at the prices high end faction loots or more specifically faction loot that cannot be consistently farmed (i.e. Officer Gear, and certain regular faction items that do not have empire lp store substitutes.) From the old weekly data I kept from when I traded faction gear (4 year data set) I found that the prices increased dramatically especially with certain changes like the introduction of LP stores and the introduction of marauders both of which directly or indirectly led to a dramatic reduction mission times and of course in increase in isk generated i.e. bounties et all. I have a run a few regressions and these and a few other variables support this view. Creating a CPI index of select faction and officer items also will also support this. You will of course see inflation having the most effect in EVE on the items and resources that the majority of the population cannot do or easily acquire themselves. Unlike the real world where people are more specialized and reliant goods produced by others, Anyone in EVE can theoretically produce any T1 and to lesser degree T2 item with minimal barriers to entry in terms of skills and capital (blueprints, et all) Since you have minimal barriers to entry and a few other variables you have market that is worse than a perfectly competitive as you still have large swaths of people willing to produce and misallocate resources in return for negative economic profit. The T2 market post invention is largely similar only with a few more barriers to entry. Remember one of the key assumptions that inflation makes is that producers and consumers are largely separate entities--an assumption that in my view largely does not hold given the "Everything I mine myself is free" mentality, Which is to be expected in a game. Furthermore, most of the incentives and disincentives that compel people to make the better EV choice really do not hold here. Sadly only CCP has the more detailed data on the variables that I desire to run regressions on regarding the latter portions of my arguments. For Skex I was merely and perhaps bluntly pointing out rigidly trying to apply real world models directly into EVE have a tendency to result in a large part of the data being unexplained by the variables, or if you are familiar with the term Omitted Variable Bias. Rather taking into account all the contexts within a framework is key. My model is by no means perfect but I believe there is a lot less omitted variable bias than other models. tl;dr: Inflation is most visible Faction/officer items and any other good that is not operating at perfect competition or worse negative economic profit(can't remember the term). And rigid application of real world theories without accounting for context leads to omitted variable bias. PRAISE THE SCOTTISH FOLD!! THEIR WILL SHALL BE DONE!!
Skex Relbore	Posted - 2010.04.23 15:34:00 - [48] FunzzeR, I don't think it's reasonable to base economic measurements on very low volume luxury goods (which is essentially what these dead space and officer items you are speaking of are) I would say that increases in the prices for those items are far more related to their rarity versus demand. Ergo they are very limited in supply (probably not increased much over the years if at all) and relatively high demand. The game has grown substantially over the years and most of that growth has been highsec where such modules are actually economical to use. Inflation is a monetary issue not a supply/demand issue. Yes prices will fluctuate on specific items based on any number of factors particularly rarity and demand but overall currency valuation is related to the amount of resources/productivity in an economy versus the total money supply. It is my opinion that inflation/deflation is best measured on broad economic indicators. In EVE I think minerals are probably the best since almost everything in this game boils down to them. They are the basis of for the bulk of the production that takes place in this game. They are also probably the most fungible asset in the game. Minerals are essentially the Petroleum of EVE. Now I do agree that one has to take some care applying real world economics to the game. The game is a far more simplified model that differs from the real world economy in a number of very critical aspects. For one there is no depreciation of assets. Things don't wear out unlike in the real world which has a huge effect on monetary behavior in the game. In real world somoene buys a car it loses value immediately. As they drive it parts wear out so they have to spend more money to maintain it. Gas, Oil, break pads, filters etc. As time goes on more and more expensive maintenance is required until the point is reached where the only remaining value is in the salvage from it's raw materials. In EVE you buy a ship and fit it out and it retains its full value until such time as it is destroyed. This is a very fundamental difference and is mainly why there is no inflation in EVE. The problem with the luxury items you are using is that they are too vulnerable to non-market forces. Changes to combat mechanics can seriously affect the desirability of those items in ways that are not related to the supply of isk in the economy. The same goes for their rarity increase the rate those items enter into the game relative to total subscription growth. Minerals on the other hand are largely immune to such effects their rarity is only based on the number of people actively farming them. The more players there are the more people will be out mining, further the more people will need the products produced with them (ships modules etc) There for their pricing is almost entirely based on monetary performance. The fact that the only thing preventing complete collapse of mineral prices is apparently Insurance Fraud further supports my assertion that there is no inflation in EVE. Tl:DR Faction,deadspace,officer gear prices are more related to expansion of the game population while supplies are remained mostly fixed, rather than any sort of indication of inflation. I've personally found it silly that most economic metrics in the real world discount Food and Gas since those are probably the best indicators for actual currency inflation/deflation in the real world since they are necessities that people must buy and are therefore most immune to secondary influences. Consider when ever anyone talks about hyper inflation do they talk about the price of yachts? No they talk about people taking wheelbarrows full of marks to buy a loaf of bread.
FunzzeR Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2010.04.23 16:10:00 - [49] Originally by: Skex Relbore FunzzeR, I don't think it's reasonable to base economic measurements on very low volume luxury goods (which is essentially what these dead space and officer items you are speaking of are).... Again I think we both are treading on new territory so we may both be right or wrong at the same time, but I would argue that certain faction items i.e. shield boosters are normal goods as opposed to luxury goods. Primarily because mission runners find them to be a worthwhile investment given the relatively low risk environment that exists in high sec. (Only a statement not an opinion regarding nerf high sec.) I will also mention that the faction market is more liquid than you might expect. Regarding minerals your logic is sound but I still believe that the key variable that is missing goes back to the point I made about the apparent absences of incentives and disincentives to engage in activities that provide a higher EV and discontinue low EV activities until a equilibrium is reached. Since this is a game a majority of participants will ignore opportunity costs and chose to pursue the activity that is more fun rather than choose the activity that provides the largest economic reward. E.g. why people choose to mine veld to build/sell when trit prices are falling. Thus, perhaps low mineral prices are a function of how people value time and their items. The devaluation of goods would be tempered if the inputs of resources were scarce and limited, but since resource inputs are all intents and purposes unlimited. You get "resource inflation" where each unit of resource gets less currency per unit over time. Its not currency inflation but inflation still exist and needs to be addressed, i.e. tightening the sources or increasing the requirements (demand side). Again unless I had access to CCP data there is no way to know for sure using econometrics, though my regressions/models when run with limited samples (n > 200) shows some promise. So one could concede that monetary inflation in a perverted classical sense exists in addition to resource inflation. PRAISE THE SCOTTISH FOLD!! THEIR WILL SHALL BE DONE!!
Menkaure Amarr LEM0N	Posted - 2010.04.23 16:16:00 - [50] Tryna simplify this down so I can get it through my head. Is this right? 1) Most stuff on the market is losing value; has been in the 6 years I've been playing. Minerals, mods, average across the board has seen a price drop. Further drop in minerals expected (by some) when insurance floor is removed soon(tm) 2) This means the buying power of 1 isk has increased. You get more for 1 isk than you did say, 4 years ago. <= definition of deflation (inflation is a rise in the general level of prices of goods and services in an economy over a period of time. When the price level rises, each unit of currency buys fewer goods and services (courtesy of wikipedia) IE So, say... 4 years ago 100m ISK would buy you ship A. Today... 90m ISK would buy you ship A. (buying power of ISK up) Buying power of ISK going up = bad. Eve's been a game about risks for a long time and everything bottoming out to pointless = very bad. The definition of deflation implies cause of this is goods input into the economy being greater than the ISK input. My understanding is that this drives the value of goods down as people have to drop prices in order to compete with large number of competitors. <=== This is where I'm getting confused. This right? HOWEVER. There is undoubtedly more high end content in the game at the moment, and players on average have more ISK than ever before, and the ability to earn more than ever before. So we have ISK worth more than what it used to be and more of it. Personally, I'd like to see a decrease in the buying power of ISK and a decrease in the amount of ISK freely available and have things worth much more (in regards to effort to obtain) compared to now. More in line with what things used to be. So what happens: Increased ISK sinks: Removes ISK from economy. Goods input stays the same. Ratio shifts even more in the direction its going. (Less ISK, more Goods = cheaper goods, higher buying power) Increased ISK faucets: Adds ISK back into economy. Goods input stays the same. Ratio shifts to inflationary. (More ISK, more Goods = more expensive goods, less buying power) Increased Goods sinks: Removes goods. ISK input stays the same. Inflationary (More ISK, Less Goods = expensive goods, less buying power) Increased Goods faucets: Goods input increased. ISK input stays the same. Deflationary (More ISK, More goods = cheaper goods, higher buying power) Am I anywhere near right with this? And if I am, what I'd like to see would be decreased goods faucets/increased sinks and increased ISK sinks. Bring quantities of goods AND ISK down.

Skex Relbore	Posted - 2010.04.23 17:35:00 - [51] I think we're arguing semantics here more than substance. Generally when people use the term inflation they are speaking of monetary inflation. The fact is that resource inflation is pretty much by definition monetary deflation. The OP of this thread was pretty obviously speaking of monetary inflation with the statement of "you know... too much isk in game..." then proceeded to ask for an ISK sink to reduce money supply further which would only serve to exacerbate the resource "inflation". I still maintain that faction, deadspace and officer loot are luxury items they are nice things to have and in some ways are an investment to increase ones earnings but they aren't needed. I'm sitting on about 4 billion in assets including 2 faction battleships in my little 2 man corp and neither of us have spent the isk on any faction or Deadspace modules hell we didn't really need the Faction BS's there purchase was simply a matter of we'd saved up the isk and we wanted them. That they increased our efficiency was almost immaterial it would still have made more economic sense to keep the T1 Domi and Raven going and move the isk into something else. Thats kind of the definition of a luxury.
Menkaure Amarr LEM0N	Posted - 2010.04.23 19:17:00 - [52] Originally by: Skex Relbore I think we're arguing semantics here more than substance. Generally when people use the term inflation they are speaking of monetary inflation. The fact is that resource inflation is pretty much by definition monetary deflation. In the end it comes down to the simple argument of whether you want things more expensive, or less expensive, and what any player wants is what they predominantly spend their time doing. If you lose ships regularly, you want the buying power of ISK to be higher. If you're an indy char, you generally want it to be lower. (albeit depending on where you are in the chain) The rest of us sit somewhere in the middle depending on our views. I know PVPers who want ships to be ridiculously expensive in order to increase loss-worth to their opponent. I know indy characters who want stuff to be cheaper to cover their losses and have lower entry barriers. Not an easy thing to balance given the many different views ingame. I've always liked the pay-massive-amounts for small-bonuses model that CCP (sort of) use. Encourages risk vs reward - everything depends on what you're willing to lose while not alienating those with smaller wallets (or *********). On the other hand, I think in recent times more expensive bonuses are getting more and more powerful. See slave sets, cynabal prices, that kinda stuff.


Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.