Ie. if too many people run missions and thereby inject ISK into the economy, then mission running, as a flat-reward activity, becomes less profitable, so less people do it?

I don't think new ISK sinks are needed. There are plenty already, started with inactive accounts via broker fees to expired insurances, destroyed items etc.

Inflation is not really a problem due to the fact that general income has grown over the years, too and anyone has the same chance to earn ISK.

Destroyed items don't remove ISK for the game. The ISK you paid for those item is in someone else wallet. The only removed ISK are those paid to NPCs, be it in taxes, broker fees, bills, skillbooks etc....

The thing is, a Level 3 mission paid 250K ISK 7 years ago. It still does today. Inflation is one of the things that make content obsolete. EVE becomes a grindwhore all about the top 1% of the content.

Posting in yet another poorly stealthed nerf high-sec thread.

nerf moon mining before you even think about touching highsec. there is a lot less risk in null compared t highsec. the argument of "you need to hold sovereignty to moon mine" is a bad argument due to the NAP-fest null has become

Wow that is low is that just the reward or with bounties included? Would it be better if Missions only gave out isk in the reward and gave something else out for ships bounties i.e more lp for ship kill or tags that are more widely used?

I'd be interested to hear your validation for that statement.

nerf moon mining before you even think about touching highsec. there is a lot less risk in null compared t highsec. the argument of "you need to hold sovereignty to moon mine" is a bad argument due to the NAP-fest null has become

24. Off-topic posting is not allowed.

Off-topic posts are not prohibited but should be posted within reason. Excessive off-topic posts that derail a thread may result in the thread being locked.

Posting in yet another poorly stealthed nerf high-sec thread.

What about changing some rat types to drop compounds that become minerals.......wait

My Idea would be to stop giving ISK bounties to missions lvl 3 and above, belt rats, and anomalies.

I read this as, "I'm a bittervet trying desperately to hang in to my advantage by making it impossible for new players to get a foot in the door."

Mr Epeen

nerf moon mining before you even think about touching highsec. there is a lot less risk in null compared t highsec. the argument of "you need to hold sovereignty to moon mine" is a bad argument due to the NAP-fest null has become

The ISK supply is steady but mineral prices and therefore T1 ships went up. If you want to revert that trend you have to revert the changes that has caused this increase of a very small part of the market (there is no inflation in EVE).

I strongly doubt you will be able to convince Soundwave that the loot drop nerf and the drone loot change where a terribad idea. And stopping the holy crusade on bots is off limits too.

The only reasonable change that would help lowmin prices come down would be to double mining output in highsec. That would render mining a void profession again. Soundwave would not be amused.

I would like to elaborate on that inflation myth. T2 prices are pretty stable, ignoring that effect of T1 items/hulls that are required to build them. Moon goo is pretty stable and planet goo and as a result POS mods are way down. So are ISK/LP rates for stuff that can be gained via Incursion or FW LP. Mission LP are pretty stable beside hulls. The latter are linked to mineral prices. Ice products are way down too. Exploration stuff went down or is stable. So where is your mythical inflation?

thank you for your expert insights like "you need sovereignty to mine moons"

nerf moon mining before you even think about touching highsec. there is a lot less risk in null compared t highsec. the argument of "you need to hold sovereignty to moon mine" is a bad argument due to the NAP-fest null has become

but mineral prices and therefore T1 ships went up.

No. Mineral prices went back to normal. You just haven't played EVE long enough. I remember a raven or a megathron costing you well over 100M isk. Guess what they cost now? The days of the 60M Raven were an aberration brought about by botters, which have been dealt with.

As for those whining about moon mining I will join you in your cry to nerf moon mining the minute you show me a moon that deposits ISK in a silo. If you can't find one then look no further than your failure to understand the EVE economy. If you're jealous of Tech moon owners then just stop buying T2 stuff. Oh wait - what? Then shut up and pay, or use alchemy.

The only way ISK is injected into the game is by bounties, mission rewards, insurance, and incursions. If I have missed any please let me know. All other activities in game just move ISK from one player to the other. I do understand that Drone Alloy, Meta 0 items and they way Insurance payout happens now had a direct effect on the prices we are seeing but I think we can agree that there are now more players in the belts then we have seen in some time. So why are mineral prices still at the level they are at was botting that bad in EVE to cause a ~100 markup on ships?

I just wonder if CCP would move away from directly injecting ISK into the game and changed how players are rewarded for bounties, missions, incursions.

Insurance I don't have a good answer for. Letting the players handle it might be the right choice but with that the desire to set up one of the largest in games scams would also be there.

[quote=gfldex]

For you idea on inflation you are saying that drone poo and t1 item drops were responsible for 50% of the minerals injected into the game? When I started playing you could buy a Domi for around 45 mill for the hull right now the same hull cost around 89 million that is close to double what it used to cost.

Mineral prices went back to normal.

I remember a raven or a megathron costing you well over 100M isk. Guess what they cost now? The days of the 60M Raven were an aberration brought about by botters, which have been dealt with.

...there is an over abundance of ISK in circulation...

What confuses me is that pre-drone alloy/meta 0 nerf announcement prices were lower despite the incursion faucet yet now with that source under some control we don't see prices falling. Is there a new faucet that I'm not accounting for?

I only got one issue here:



I don't think I pulled the statement out of context here. As the quoted statements above stands, one could come to the conclusion that this is a well known fact. And if it would be a fact, it means that a hard line between the scenario where there isn't an over abundance of ISK and where there is exists. This can't be a gradual transition, nor a fuzzy line.

Before this discussion can even continue, the magical number which defines the line between over abundance or not, needs to be established.

I'd give Sov a much higher number. I'd say that number is based on base Sov with no I-Hub or I-Hub upgrades. Put in to account the amount of space that has been entrenched in the same alliances for 1 to 4 years, the Sov I-Hubs are easily 100 times that.

I would be interested to see the same snap shot from this month as well as we didn't have incursions or blue ribbons on here as faucets either.

But you also have to remember that PI would be a lower number as well because of the POCO. This was just to show the amount of isk that is created daily even if it is 2 years old.