Dr.EyjoG repeated his statement from FanFest 2012 that the sinks and faucets in the game are not correct (which is relevant to the previous discussion) and pulled up a chart demonstrating this. By far the largest faucet in the game is NPC Bounty Prizes, at over 30T ISK/month. The biggest sink is Skill Books, at a mere 6T ISK/month.

CCP seem to appropriately be more concerned with money velocity than absolute values. Also, we don't have an important number: how much of those 30T end up segregated or abandoned (due i.e. to players turnover)? Without those informations it's not possible to balance inflow and outflow.

CCP seem to appropriately be more concerned with money velocity than absolute values. Also, we don't have an important number: how much of those 30T end up segregated or abandoned (due i.e. to players turnover)? Without those informations it's not possible to balance inflow and outflow.

I didn't see Alliance fee's in the list. Should be a substantial amount

Also: Is there a realistic summary/equation that sums up the net results of ship losses in EVE?

And Last: Some peoples goal in ANY game, is to hoard ISK. This would be funds that never really affect markets or economies. I would think at some point, these same players will find a 'comfort zone' and quit generating ISK altogether. But really, my point is, does stale ISK (ISK in some random wallet) really hurt anything?

Also: Is there a realistic summary/equation that sums up the net results of ship losses in EVE?

Ship losses aren't an isk sink, there is no isk destroyed when you lose a ship only value the same way that a miner doesn't create any isk but creates value. Actually due to the insurance system it's more of an isk faucet than anything else and to be honest i don't find that system really interesting so i wouldn't mind if CCP just delete that.

I agree with you on the technical application of the words 'sink' and 'faucet'. Value loss is a good term for ship loss. My point is though, isn't value loss essentially the same thing? And doesn't it have the same leveling effect on macro economics?

Also: Add pod loss to my previous list. Implants = value loss in the same way.

When you lose a ship you wil have to buy a new one thus giving isk to manufacturers, explorers and whatnot so you will just transfer part of your isk to those people while CCP will only take a marginal cut from taxes.

NPC prices for everything need more increase.

Mission difficulty of NPC rats need an increase and payout increased depending on the specific difficulty of said rat in mission.

I propose, half the rats in missions get completely random difficulty modifiers, from 1-10, 1 would pay the least ISK for that rat kill 10 would pay the most and of course the drops must be stingy on the 10's and 1's while 7-8 yield meta 4 loot and a .0000001% chance for random officer type drop.

possibly even giving players a chance to play easy mode with half payout drops and bounty and regular mode for new changes to even things out commercially wise.

Sorry to say it bluntly but i don't think you understand what this is about.

If your Hulk gets destroyed you will lose an asset, you will lose something valuable but the game will not see any isk being removed from that loss. Thus it's not an isk sink... The discussion here is not about if this loss matters to you will if you will have to grind isk a bit longer but if this loss will mitigate the creation of isk or will tend to reduce the inflation. In both cases it won't.

can someone help me here ? lol

A killmail takes a 300m hulk/asset for e.g. turns it into item drops, a small insurance payout & a small amount of sorebutt.

Now, if i have to buy a new one, do i still have 300m? no. i have item drops & a small insurance payout. the game/myself has lost isk. whether the isk was 'sunk' directly by CCP from taxes or not is irrelevant, 300m isk has been removed from the game.

I believe what you are saying is that ship losses, stimulate & propagate industry types to make ships etc and sell them. thats fine, but i still lost isk in the first instance, not when i buy a new one.

i can't see it any other way.

I think Value Loss, especially uninsured items, mods, implants, etc. can be treated the same as any other sink.

A killmail takes a 300m hulk/asset for e.g. turns it into item drops, a small insurance payout & a small amount of sorebutt.

Now, if i have to buy a new one, do i still have 300m? no. i have item drops & a small insurance payout. the game/myself has lost isk. whether the isk was 'sunk' directly by CCP from taxes or not is irrelevant, 300m isk has been removed from the game.

There is no difference to the amount of isk in the game in those two, outside of the insurance payout you receive.

It's the difference between dropping a $1 apple down a garbage disposal, and setting fire to a one dollar bill. Just because you can go to a grocery store and exchange them doesn't mean the two are the same.

there is a 300m difference, i could sell the item, if i lose it i can't.

this is what happens with a mechanical engineer argues with ecomonics major's isn;t it

Yes it is

Bedtime for me. Great discussion. NN all.

CCP seem to appropriately be more concerned with money velocity than absolute values. Also, we don't have an important number: how much of those 30T end up segregated or abandoned (due i.e. to players turnover)? Without those informations it's not possible to balance inflow and outflow.

3 - whether the playerbase is trending towards fielding assets that require more resources (and thus more cash to denominate the value of such and/or act as reserve for replacements).

Bump manufacturing fees in highsec. If my estimates are correct, changing it from the current negligible system to a mere quarter percent of estimated value of the production job is worth upwards of 3-6T isk/month in sinks while having negligible effects on the sale price of items between players.

I didn't see Alliance fee's in the list. Should be a substantial amount
(snip)

this is what happens when a mechanical engineer argues with ecomonics major's isn't it

But then I might have to actually start tracking my manufacturing fees and including them in my spreadsheets.

I'm a mechanical engineer too. What's your problem?



Pfft. 375k on a 150m isk ship. Cry me a river.

Small world ^_^

tis.

An Eve Story, that brings some things up id like answered. Learned alot today, plan on keeping on

i introduced a guy i worked with to eve recently, was interesting to watch him develop a sense of things EVE. I gave him 100m Starter isk to get him set up, plenty for skillbooks and a few ships.

He started out with 1 character mining alot, then after he was teased about it at work, doing the missions etc, he wasn't skilled enough to handle the level 3 missions so he stuck to level 2's.

i took an eve break for new WoW exp.
Fast forward 3 Months
whooash back playing eve

Shortly after i came back, i caught up with him in game (he got fired from work, so didn't have any way to get in touch, to check on his progress)

He said he "plexed up" bought them of the eve website, bought 3 characters and now runs 4 accounts, 3 in a class 2 wormhole and 1 in highsec station Trading.

Its an interesting behavior pattern, when i asked him why did you do that? his response was simple,"i couldn't make any isk.", he figured if he bought a tengu alt, and a salvager/prober alt, that they would. Making isk is a big part of the hook for alot of players that play the game, I introduced him to a few players, that lived in a c2 wh, he was amazed at the amount of isk the wh dwellers was making, but his skills couldn't handle it.

Now, what if we applied some math to the actual new players (not alts) that come to eve, buy 15b+ in isk directly from the print machine. and say 20% of say 500? actual new players. thats alot of plex & Isk changing hands.

When he bought the plex he received 12 newly npc created items, with a value of 500m.? i understand the only thing that gets created is the cards, which are destroyed when used by players. however he still ends up with the isk. which he has splashed around here and there, becoming somewhat of a faucet for builders and character traders.

Would it be safe to say that a high% of the daily volume is actually new plex cards.? Discuss.
What are the ramifications of this behaviour to the economy?

Sorry No TL:DR

Short answer no.

As with the situation where a ship is destroyed when someone buys a plex with real money then sells it there is no real change in the amount of isk in game - the person who sold the plex personally has gained (say) 560 million isk however at the same time the person who bought that plex has lost 560 million.

There is in fact a very minor decrease in total isk in game due to market fees.

Kithran

Thanks for your answer. little confused on why your saying 'short anwser no' though, agree with what you had written above as its essentially the same as the last paragraph of what i wrote?

Nope. Because you called it a faucet.

Perhaps clones need to have an increase in price?

I would pay ISK (and to a certain degree real money) for a NPC service that moves all of my assets that are scattered throughout eve to one location.

Perhaps another is for people who rat in high sec mission or incursion that activity is only available if you are part of a NPC corp?

The act of JC-ing to have a cost?

Confrontation fuels any economy.

CCP should do more to fuel confrontation... I have said this for years now - give the people something to shoot at that will either..

1. Ruin someones day or
2. cause the owner to defend it.

I would like to see an Incursion type areana but with perhaps CCP running these so called live events.

Or perhaps more tounament based areana.... just something to make people want to spend isk.

I have about 5bil in the bank, anything i earn goes into a PVP ship. I personally hate grinding but find incursions a good and enjoyable pass time. I don't think incursions are the reason for increase in PLEX. Its quite possible due to the effect of moon mining. (dont get confused i am talking about moon mining and not the act of reacting).

Role eve back 5 years at a time when small roaming groups were frequent - thats eve at its best and i think the nano nerf stopped a lot of roaming gangs.

Now i use t1 cruisers and destroyers becuase they are cheap and good fun, and with the act of being blobbed its makes taking a more expensive ship out roaming hard to justify.

Perhaps what we need is a different types of fuel for all types of ships and not just capitals..that is an item managed by CCP and not a player based thing or, certain items in game will contain a VAT payment.

You can make a lot of accounts to real life. people will spend money on new items so we need new items - however this may not be as simple as it seems since adding new items means so many different other paths need to be walked.

Great ideas, J-Cing especially not many new players do this. the clones are effected by new players, but as with my example above most new ones i know buy plex. so can probs afford it anyway vOv

I think you and Raven are both wrong about that. Whereas in real life consumption is the fuel of the economy in EVE it is not so good.

If everyone start to pvp more then there will be more circulation of isk so there will be inflation, that's for sure whereas most of the source of income are independant from the player's market so at the end it would be bad for mission runners, plexers and guys doing incursions...

In real life we can see that when a country starts to develop quickly there is a big inflation (see : China) but it is still a good thing for that country as unemployment is reduced and the counrty can "catch up" with the more developped countries, there are no "developped countries" in EVE and no unemployment... The reasoning doesn't apply here.



That being said i love PvP but if we just look at inflation it's debatable to promote a lot more pvp.

yes my mate spent 15b on characters & tengus :\ and i called it a faucet, re-read it. "kind of like a faucet" derp.

as in specifically my mate leaking 15b derp.

It is NOT a faucet.

Your friend got the 15 Bil from selling PLEX. That isk came from players who bought those PLEX. The isk was not created out of thin air. It was already in the game. it just changed hands. Had he payed CCP and magically had the isk appear in his wallet then it would be an isk faucet. But he did not recieve isk, he received items he sold for isk. That isk was already in the game, just in someone else's wallet. Neither is PLEX an isk sink as when it is used, it is the item removed from the game. The isk just changes hand between the player buying the PLEX and the player selling the PLEX. If the PLEX was converted to AURUM it would be an AURUM faucet, but still not an isk faucet as it does not affect the total amount of isk in game. only whose pocket that isk is in.

Isk sinks and Facets has nothing to do with what character holds the isk. Or how much isk changes hands. It is a change in the total amount of isk in circulation within the in game economy.

A faucet is new isk coming into the game that previously did not exist. for example, bounties when you kill an NPC. or isk payouts for mission rewards. Basically any isk recieved by a player that did not come from another player. that isk is new, not just new to your character, but newly generated in the game. it did not come from another buying goods from you. it was created from nothing.

A sink is existing isk in the game being removed. having to buy a new ship is not an isk sink, as that isk does not leave the game, it goes to who ever you bought the ship off of. When a ship gets destroyed is it an isk sink? No, Why? Even if the total isk value of the items destroyed is greater than the value of the dropped loot plus the insurance payout. It would seem like an isk sink, but really no isk was actually removed from the game.

The minerals used to build that ship and its modules were removed from the game, but no isk. For example a battleship fully fitted is worth say 1 biliion isk. It gets destroyed, it drops 500M worth of loot, and the insurance payout is 200M. The owner of the ship lost 1 billion minus the 200M insurance so 800M. but the value lost was only 300M as 500M worth of loot dropped. The loot dropped belongs to someone else, but its value is still retained in the game. It would seem that this would be a 300M isk sink, but really it was minerals destroyed not isk, minerals mined by someone, and sold for isk. The isk payed for those minerals is still in the game.

Since minerals are constantly regenerated through re-spawning asteroid belts no actual isk was lost. So even though the owner of the ship lost 800M worth of assets, and 300M of assets were destroyed with no compensation, no actual isk was removed from the game as the isk used to purchase the ship and all its fittings went into the hands of another player. Had the ship been bought from an NPC then its total value would have been an isk sink. But since the isk stayed in the game going into the hands of the seller of the ship, no actual isk left the game when the ship was destroyed, so the actual sink is zero.

The only true isk sinks are when isk is given to an NPC. Sure there are often items brought into the game but the isk does not simply change hands it is removed. For example when you buy a skill book for 500M the isk you spent goes to the NPC and is removed from the game. You can then sell that skill book possibly for more than you paid for it, 550M, but that isk is just changing hands. You are left with a net gain of 50M but the 500M you paid is still gone from the game. The 550M you got was just isk changing hands from another player within the game. The game as a whole had a net loss of 500M isk when that skillbook was purchased from the NPC.

Bounties and mission payouts generate isk from nothing, while activities such as running wormhole sites do not generate isk. You may thing, wait, running wormhole sites makes more isk than missions or ratting. How can it not be a faucet? Well, sleepers in wormhole sites do not pay bounties they drop items, those items, such as nano ribbons, are then sold to other players for isk. No new isk is generated, it is just existing isk changing hands. That is the difference. New isk being brought into the game generated from nothing is a faucet, while isk already in the game changing hands between players is not a faucet no matter how much isk changes hands. How much isk goes in and out of your character wallet makes no difference, it is how much isk goes in and out of the game without coming from or going to another player.

If the eve economy needs "rebalancing", and the reason why it is out of sink is becuase of NPC payouts (im interested to know if that includes incursions)

this is what happens when a mechanical engineer argues with ecomonics major's isn't it

I am willing to bet the Escalation Incursion nerfs cut Incursion ISK by 70-80% per month.
I'm curious if what I'm hearing from Missions&Complexes forum is true & they've seen an appreciable ISK profit cut since the release of Retribution due to the new AI & the TD bugs.

No, I'm a mechanical engineer and I understand this **** perfectly.
This is what happens when a ******* MORON debates with people who actually have a basic understanding of the game.

I think you and Raven are both wrong about that. Whereas in real life consumption is the fuel of the economy in EVE it is not so good.

If everyone start to pvp more then there will be more circulation of isk so there will be inflation, that's for sure whereas most of the source of income are independant from the player's market so at the end it would be bad for mission runners, plexers and guys doing incursions...

In real life we can see that when a country starts to develop quickly there is a big inflation (see : China) but it is still a good thing for that country as unemployment is reduced and the counrty can "catch up" with the more developped countries, there are no "developped countries" in EVE and no unemployment... The reasoning doesn't apply here.



That being said i love PvP but if we just look at inflation it's debatable to promote a lot more pvp.

No, I'm a mechanical engineer and I understand this **** perfectly.
This is what happens when a ******* MORON debates with people who actually have a basic understanding of the game.

I'm not an expert at economics, so please correct me if I am wrong.

The inflation of the price of final products leads to an increase in the price of raw goods used to make the ships, modules, etc being blown up due to more conflict. The increase of price in raw goods leads to more people harvesting those raw goods (miners, PI, etc) creating downward pressure on the price of raw goods. Those raw goods are then turned into more ships, modules, etc, decreasing the price of those final products.

So in the end, an increase in conflict/consumption mainly increases the rate at which isk exchanges hands, but may not necessarily increase the price of goods in the long run as people adjust to the new demand?

Yes, but it didn't really have any effect on non-PLEX commodities, or if it did that effect was buried under everything else (rise and fall of minerals, tech, etc). That's my point - PLEX is the only item in Eve that responds in any perceptible way to that sort of inflationary pressure.

Bounties and mission payouts generate isk from nothing, while activities such as running wormhole sites do not generate isk. You may thing, wait, running wormhole sites makes more isk than missions or ratting. How can it not be a faucet? Well, sleepers in wormhole sites do not pay bounties they drop items, those items, such as nano ribbons, are then sold to other players for isk. No new isk is generated, it is just existing isk changing hands.

Velocity of money seems to have an awfully minimal if not non-existent effect on inflation of non-PLEX goods in this game though.

Back to sinks & faucets:
something that really disturbed me was the ISK sink reductions of FW tiers (75%)which once where taken out had an immediate effect on PLEX prices. Further more I still argue that in the long term (2 years) those ISK reductions per item will have a net negitive in the LP sink eventhough in the short term alot of ISK was taken out of the economy.

Your earlier post discussing replacing mission reward ISK with LP has merit but due to the lingering effects of reduced ISK LP from the FW bonanza LP value is espeically suffering. A way to counter that would be addition of new valuable LP items. Furthermore the FW LP bonanza had a very definite deflationary effect on items such as Fleet Issue stabbers and probably all faction ammos except Amar faction crystals.

I'm mildly curious how much the FW bonanza contributed to deflation too.

FW Tiers did nothing to alter the "sinkiness" of an LP.
Tier 1: 1000 LP + 1000 ISK = 1 Item. => 1000 ISK sunk for 1000 LP.
Tier 5: 250LP + 1000 ISK = 1 Item => 1000LP + 1000 ISK = 4 Items. => 1000 ISK sunk or 1000 LP.

Each LP takes the same amount of ISK down the drain with it when it's used, and I didn't see any evidence of high tiers resulting in massive hoards of unspent LP being socked away because "I only needed the one item."

The market value of the resulting item is entirely irrelevant to the amount of ISK that LP stores sink.


The price of a product decreasing because the cost to produce that product has decreased is not "deflation," it's the normal workings of the market. Just like cruiser prices didn't rise (aren't rising) after Retribution because of "inflation," they rose (are rising) because the cost to produce them has increased.

If they'd left it in long enough to completely shatter the markets, perhaps.(snip) .

Malarky 4 items where introduced where there was 1 before for the same price as 1. Unless demand is perfectly elastic we're looking at a significant ISK sink reduction over time. I would not doubt that there is some elasticity found in cheaper FW items but I think its fairly rigid

If demand were inelastic,

I agree with your implication that the velocity of money affects the price of PLEX and the extreme increase thanks to the 'summer of FW lp bonanza ' went to prove that. I think this discussion though is better discussed in the thread I put forth about the PLEX intervention.

Show me how consumer demand for implants has increased? or especially why it will in the future?

FW Tiers did nothing to alter the "sinkiness" of an LP.
Tier 1: 1000 LP + 1000 ISK = 1 Item. => 1000 ISK sunk for 1000 LP.
Tier 5: 250LP + 1000 ISK = 1 Item => 1000LP + 1000 ISK = 4 Items. => 1000 ISK sunk or 1000 LP.

Show me how consumer demand for implants has increased? or especially why it will in the future?

Your numbers are a bit off though, the old formula looked more like:
Tier 1: 4000 LP + 4000 ISK = 1 item
Tier 2: 2000 LP + 2000 ISK = 1 item
Tier 3: 1000 LP + 1000 ISK = 1 item
Tier 4: 500 LP + 500 ISK = 1 item
Tier 5: 250 LP + 250 ISK = 1 item

That is why people cashed out at T5 or if desperate T4. It's why the new tiers don't change either the LP or ISK in the stores, only how much LP you gain for doing tasks. You could easily make 4000 isk/lp in the old system, while now 1000+isk/lp is great*.

*Haven't looked at the prices across the entire market recently, but that's what it was last I looked. Of course, some items might still give high payouts, I'm talking general items without crashing the market.

Doesn't matter. The ISK is sunk at the point of item creation. What happens to the item later is irrelevant.

So demand doesn't matter?

Bump manufacturing fees in highsec. If my estimates are correct, changing it from the current negligible system to a mere quarter percent of estimated value of the production job is worth upwards of 3-6T isk/month in sinks while having negligible effects on the sale price of items between players.

Different approach: Eliminate isk payouts and time bonuses for missions, replace them with an LP payout instead. This approaches the problem by both removing a faucet (roughly ~6T/mo by Diagoras' old numbers) and adding a sink (the isk required to spend that LP, which is typically 1000 isk per LP on the most convenient cashout items.) This also allows them to dial mission income around a bit, depending on the rate that they replace the isk payouts with LP at. For example, if they replace it at a 1000 isk per LP rate, then a mission runner would have to buy items with that LP that are worth a final sale price of 1000 isk/LP to maintain his previous income...but could increase his income by taking a more thoughtful approach to redeeming his LP than "buy as many implants as possible and dump to buy orders."

The specific numbers don't matter. All that matters is the fact that the ratio of ISK sunk to LP converted stays constant within any given LP store offer.

Do you have any suggestions for switching over wormhole items to counter that source?

What do you mean by that?

So unless I'm off base here you're the next CSM chair ya?

What do you consider an appropriate growth in the isk supply?

If your two suggestions were implemented we would still have ~18T or more coming in per month.

Do you have any suggestions for switching over wormhole items to counter that source?

Eliminating bluebooks would require further iteration on wormholes to add value to replace it...at least some of it. Wormholes aren't my forte and I'm not really sure how much of their income is from the bluebooks vs other items, but an outright and complete removal is probably inadvisable. Partial replacement might be a welcome change from the wormhole crowd, but it's not something I've thought too much about as far as concrete ideas. ;)

If you lose a Hulk you lose a ship but you don't lose isk so the total amount of money in the game stays the same and is even increased by the insurance payout. I really don't see how you can disagree with me on that. :P

Dr.EyjoG repeated his statement from FanFest 2012 that the sinks and faucets in the game are not correct (which is relevant to the previous discussion) and pulled up a chart demonstrating this. By far the largest faucet in the game is NPC Bounty Prizes, at over 30T ISK/month. The biggest sink is Skill Books, at a mere 6T ISK/month.

compare that to http://twostep4csm.blogspot.com/2012/03/its-econmony-stupid.html

As a sink skill books have dropped from ~7trillion to 6 as the highest sink ergo lp sink has dropped to under 6 trillion even with the FW lp summer bonanza to probably under 6 trillion from last year February's 6.2 trillion!

this is what happens when a mechanical engineer argues with ecomonics major's isn't it

"Appropriate growth" isn't something I can really give a firm answer to because there's a lot of information I'm missing. You do want some level of growth in the isk supply though, as the player supply is always growing. A fixed or even shrinking amount of isk for an ever-increasing (or so we hope) number of players is a bad thing.

I'd note that the two previous suggestions I made would have a greater effect than that. Rewards and time bonuses removes a 5t/mo faucet, replacing them with LP at a 1000:1 ratio means that another 5T/mo (give or take, the ratio for LP redemption isn't always 1000:1) is removed to redeem it. Then there's the estimated 3-6T on top of that.

Eliminating bluebooks would require further iteration on wormholes to add value to replace it...at least some of it. Wormholes aren't my forte and I'm not really sure how much of their income is from the bluebooks vs other items, but an outright and complete removal is probably inadvisable. Partial replacement might be a welcome change from the wormhole crowd, but it's not something I've thought too much about as far as concrete ideas. ;)

When a player purchases a hulk they are basically converting their isk into potential isk.

You can sell the hulk for 200 million isk potentially.

If you lose a hulk you lose the potential for 200 million isk. It doesn't remove isk from the market, but it does remove the potential isk of the player who owned the ship.

Potential isk is just as important as actual isk. I mean if everyone had 10 hulks and 1 million isk. The hulk wouldn't be worth 1 million since everyone had a hulk.

2 and a half suggestions:

1 Insurance Payouts. Don't pour the ISK directly into a players wallet anymore. Instead, give him an option to collect a ship at a reduced rate, through the 'redeem items' venue. This will turn off the faucet and actually sink a few ISK along the way. Kill two birds with one stone. Double impact and all that.

2 Make implants an NPC item. Aside from the LP conversion, they are essentially a sink the second you install them anyway, as they cannot be removed or resold. Place them in limited locations, so marketers can still work them over if they wish.

When I was seriously (for me) ship building, I was pulling 9bil of mins a week from the market. At the time, an unbonused hulk earned about 12mil/hr in highsec. Presuming 20mil/hr counting null ores and boosts, thats 450 hulk hours of ore I was going through a week or probably 30 players efforts.

Having CCP nationalize that business via insurance would pretty much destroy the ship builder market, which would flood people and capital into other construction tasks, and flood miners into bounty collection as mineral consumption dived.

if bounties are provably too high (they aren't), then reduce bounties.



LP is a currency. Homogenizing the currency to isk won't solve the percieved too much currency problem. Matter of fact its worse, because you'll have to provide more isk and less LP to sustain the LP value, so all you've done here is produce more raw isk.

I'd do it by boiling frogs.

Start with mission reward -> LP. Similarly, have Tier officer drops give Concord LP rather than cash.

Nerf insurance by edging up the prices of insurance, and declining to cover self-destruction. I dont think you could simply refuse to insure ships in Null, but a man can dream, right ?

Bring back drone poo rather than bounties.

Nerf Hub isk income by dropping the bounty payments, but compensate by having the miniboss always appear and dropping an appropriate Tier officer drop.

I'd increase manufacturing slots by making the cost dynamic - the more manufacturing/ME/whatever slots are in use in a station, the higher the price goes.

[


The more general theme here of replacing some of the bounty in nullsec with some kind of loot is a good one. I'm not sure I'd go so far as to make it officer loot, however.

I should have clarified things better.

Lets take a Gurista Forsaken Hub, which currently drops 27m worth of bounties.

I would halve the cash bounties on the rats so it drops 12m isk worth of bounties, and have the Dreadnought at the end always spawn, and always drop a Tier X Officers Personal Effects, which can be traded at a Concord station for Y Loyalty Points.

Rarely, it will drop ammo, a crystal implant, or whatever else, so we dont get more of those things coming into the game than currently.

Essentially, the idea is to replace *cash* rewards, with *stuff* rewards.

Lets take Concord and Our friendly insurance company work together. No payout for insurance who was destroyed by Concord. The insurance shouldnt be in the caulation if you gank or not.

Hi there.

This might interest you. Please take note of the date, November 29, 2011.

Don't get mad. All of the tear vacuums are being used in C&P right now.

:(

Starbase charters (those things used as part of the fuel load for hisec POSes) are available from most NPC LP stores. Which charters are you thinking of?

And they cost no ISK when purchased from any LP stores. So they have no ISK sinking effect.

To candy's question: if they cost more LP, they'd just rise in price until they reached a new isk/LP where they were worth selling. It wouldn't really have any major effect on other items like implants.

Replace the components used in T2 BPO (Not Invented T2 BPC's) with NPC Seeded pipes/bolts w/e + Some morphite & 1 original item

e.g. Proposed T2 BPO (Heavy Missile Launcher II ) Ingredients using BPO

*1 Heavy Missile Launcher - (player driven)
*12 Shiney Casings - (New NPC good Value appropriate (Say 13,000 isk), to cause no spike in Price)
*230 Morphite

This would do a few things.

It would innocently take isk out of the system. (as long as the price to make them is viable)
It would cause some Butt-Frustration on forums, like any T2 BPO related post.
It could make invention Compete better in some markets. (if some player driven event drove down some prices for invention mebe)

if anything, we should see a large spike in Self entitled Butthurt rants.

(a) you typically get a faction rat "commander", spawn at the end of an anom. You will typically get an "overseer" at the end of the escalation. You won't get an "officer".
(b) LP is a currency, people will sit on it till they need it in cash, just like they sit on isk.
(c) anomolies, escalation and exploration are all part of a skinnerbox reward system. Pulling it apart just turns into mission running, and if I wanted missioney-space-accountant-grind, I'd run missions.
(d) I have no idea how far I would have to travel with physical stuff like a tag or an annoyingly large box to find a DED or a CONCORD station for handing in basic rewards but for many people that would suck. IMO whole point to owning space is that at least 1 thing there is rewarding for the average pilot. that just sounds like more annoying null logistics.
(e) at 3 or 4 people per system logged on, and 50+ people logged into highsec mission hubs, I can't imagine that lowsec and null anoms are the greater part of bounties.
(f) if you reduce the supply of isk you'll make the isk a lot more valuable and more people will try fetch it.

Upon reading the DEV blog on bounties I realized that they had not mentioned a 1 time ISK sink: The retirement of the old bounties. I wonder if that was in the trillions.

Whilst im all for making T2 BPO's identical in build cost to generating the same product from invention (including the invention costs) Ie add the ingredients required to invent to the BPO bill of materials.
Your proposal falls down at this point:

*12 Shiney Casings - (New NPC good Value appropriate (Say 13,000 isk), to cause no spike in Price)

Why would CCP who have been working hard to remove as many NPC items as possible to create a Player driven market suddenly decide to introduce an NPC item for no reason whats so ever. T2 BPO production costs can be increased with out the need to add a new NPC item.

Another idea i had, is VV.

Yes VV, or the like, set up an ISK sink fund, collect a certain amount, then biomass that character with isk in hand, now that i'd like to see!

I agree with you on the technical application of the words 'sink' and 'faucet'. Value loss is a good term for ship loss. My point is though, isn't value loss essentially the same thing? And doesn't it have the same leveling effect on macro economics?

Also: Add pod loss to my previous list. Implants = value loss in the same way.

"this change would also greatly benefit new players"

A sink is existing isk in the game being removed. having to buy a new ship is not an isk sink, as that isk does not leave the game, it goes to who ever you bought the ship off of. When a ship gets destroyed is it an isk sink? No, Why? Even if the total isk value of the items destroyed is greater than the value of the dropped loot plus the insurance payout. It would seem like an isk sink, but really no isk was actually removed from the game.

Since minerals are constantly regenerated through re-spawning asteroid belts no actual isk was lost

This is the Broken Window Fallacy. Yes, the miners and shipbuilders get isk to replace the ship. However, if the Hulk had not been destroyed, that isk would have been available for the miner to re-invest and spend elsewhere. The cost of the barge is canceling out the mining time for the materials to build the barge, instead of being leveraged more efficiently.Are you really going to add M.I.M.A.F. to your economic stumblings? The mining costs time - time which could have been spent elsewhere.

It's not like almost one page of this thread is about explaining why a ship destruction is actually a faucet...

200mil

This is the Broken Window Fallacy. Yes, the miners and shipbuilders get isk to replace the ship. However, if the Hulk had not been destroyed, that isk would have been available for the miner to re-invest and spend elsewhere. The cost of the barge is canceling out the mining time for the materials to build the barge, instead of being leveraged more efficiently.

The nulsec alliances have the biggest faucets and regularly inject the isk into the economy via jita. They get a large amount of isk from anomolies which they generate using infrastructure. Those anomolies give the runner 20M isk per tick in bounties; 3 per hour. That's on the conservative side. The amount of isk pumped into the game borders on the eye-watering.

So, sorry kid

If he wants to be derisive and condescending, I reserve the right to be derisive and condescending in return.

Two wrongs...

Number of kills is a poor metric. One player in high sec running level 1s might kill hundreds of rats, but never equal the bounty total from one null rat. I'm sure the bounty total is higher in high sec, but CCP has never broken down the bounties by sec status as far as i know, at least not recently.

I can make a reasonable argument that the faucet from bounties in highsec missions is as big if not bigger than the faucet from anomalies in nullsec. Wanna see it? Here.



--) Sophistry removed (--

So, sorry kid, the "blame" for the faucet from bounties is probably split evenly, at best, between highsec and nullsec. But a definite slant towards highsec wouldn't surprise me, either.

teach me

WH bounties are a separate stat from the actual bounties, so they wouldn't be included in the ~30T/mo. They were almost 7T back last January though, so it's definitely true that wormhole dwellers pump out quite the faucet...especially since the total faucet from "things sold to NPCs" was about 10.5T for the whole month.

"Every single rat killed in nullsec is a battleship worth a million or more, therefore we can count those numbers as billions."

So lets see, if we use my overly generous assessment of 2.4 million rats killed that day in nullsec, worth a million apiece, we get a total of 2.4 trillion isk.

In one day.

When around thirty trillion or so in a whole month is more the norm. When more like half of what you're trying to claim would be a normal day.

Even if we bring into this the fact that every single anomaly in nullsec has a 1:1 ratio of battleships to smaller ships in it (as do belt rat spawns, when they have battleships at all) and say that the average rat value killed in nullsec is a mere 500k, the same argument you're using still results in the claim that nullsec is producing all the bounties, which is demonstrably not true.

I'll refrain from bothering to present any more evidence, since you're happily inclined to handwave it away as "sophistry", nevermind the lack of evidence of your own. Come back when you can make an argument that makes sense given the numbers available.

Bear with me as this post is via phone. It seems to me that if you wanted to balance the f&s of eve it would be best to start with the sinks . The prime flaw in the largest sink of the game NPC sells is of the permancy of the items being sold. Due to the nature ofbbpos and the kill scentific networking very few bpos are left exposed and sit in almost complete safety so the number of rebuys on bpos is low.. simply removing that skill and reffunding sp would make a solid impact.. The next issue with the bpos is that although there has been many revamps on old ships few new ships have come out compartivly.. it seems like some of these rebalances could be converted into mk2 version with a new bpo.. new Isk sinks etc.. Finally the last thought that comes to skill.. a new type of premium skill which when podded the skill would be lost including skillbooks.. any rebalance to the f&s of eve should come by expansion to the eve universe not by its diminishment.

We need new isk coming into the game every day. We need new players to be able to earn isk so they can use loyalty point stores.

The point about faucets and sinks is more about where can they be changed and what amount of isk entering the system is healthy.

Or hey, I could be wrong about everything.

"You know, bounties contribute a lot of the faucet and nullsec likely is a big part of it, maybe we could replace some or all of the isk they produce with some other way to reward players for killing them"

As the economy of this game functions in a similar (same?) way as real life, it's probably best to look at the world in order to determine how to combat this inflation problem.

Plus in RL you don't necessarily have a "positive expectation" on money.

I would say that a bigger chunk of that is the fact that, in RL, people have to eat*. In EVE, not so much.


*to include food, housing, medicine, etc.

Yet despite the obvious need to eat, in RL we don't necessarily have positive expectation, which leads to wars, starvations etc.

In EvE not only we don't care of those bodily needs but we have easy ISK spilling out of nowhere.

[(the FW stuff was actually a very major sink)..

I'd argue FW stuff didn't increase the LP sink since from the CSM notes skill books sink appears to have decreased fromCCP Diagoras last tweet about them & LP store sink did not overtake them as #1 according to Dr E in the last CSM summit notes.

There was I recall an implied promise of an DEV blog about the PLEX intervention for mid Janruary which never materialized where I hoped beyond hope this would also be discussed but its looking like we're going to be in the dark until Fanfest were I suspect a murkry economic summary will be unvailed concerningfaucets & sinks.

You'd be insane to think that it didn't increase some, it was a massive farmer goldrush. Pilot population was 2-3x what it is now in FW.

It was 1/4 the ISK sink at tier 5. There is a reason Dr E ain't showing the numbers...
Dr E show us the money!

It was 1/4 the ISK sink at tier 5. There is a reason Dr E ain't showing the numbers...
Dr E show us the money!

Oh boy, here we go again.

You're on this claim again.

Where is your evidence for massive stockpiles of unspent LP caused by gaining high tier (literally the only case where high tier results in less ISK being sunk)?

My evidence is from the CSM notes the skill books are stated to be down to near 6 trillion sink a month and are the #1 ISK sink and compare that to CCP Diagoras last publishing of the LP store ISK sink which was 6.3 trillion a month.

I do wish that the label of that chart was labeled September, October, or November 2012 but here we have hard numbers (evidence) that the LP Store sink has fallen from nearly a year ago. The most likely culprit was the FW insanity over the summer.

Dr E if you are reading this do you want to pipe in?

It doesn't.

In real life manufactured goods can't be made by absolutely anyone with only a minimal barrier to entry that results in cutthroat competition and drives the cost of those goods down very close to the cost of their raw materials, which in turn can be obtained by absolutely anyone with only a minimal barrier to entry that results in cutthroat competition and ruthlessly drives those goods in strict adherance to supply and demand.

and why the only thing that prompted the price of those T1 goods to change was the removal of an enormous supply faucet of minerals.

If normal inflationary pressures apply to manufactured goods --) snip (--

There are other reasons why it may be prudent to limit the size of the net faucet in the game, and there are all manner of ways of doing that

--) snip (-- but that's not really "reducing" the sink so much as it is a matter of less isk being sunk than somehow could have been.

Isk Sink: Name change & employment history wiped when buying character - cost 2 plex (destroyed)

re-invent yourself literally.

Ink Sink... economy rage.. non monocle... using isk not plex

Thread needs more monocles, only ruby looks distinguished enough amongst these wallflowers.

This coat > a monocle. Sorry.

Paradoxically increasing the supply of minerals due to mining becoming far more worthwhile than before. The faucet merely changed shape.

Stay on topic, which is managing the amount of isk in the economy. I (still) realise you are blindly defending your cashflow, but manufactured goods don't inflate; the cash supply does. All this noise you're creating is a poorly executed attempt to obscure this.

... as long as none of them interfere with your cashflow?

For the record? I'm not trying to "halt any discussion on blah blah blah whatever drivel you spat out." You'd have gotten a much better response if you'd come in and said "You know, bounties contribute a lot of the faucet and nullsec likely is a big part of it, maybe we could replace some or all of the isk they produce with some other way to reward players for killing them" instead of dropping in with the implication that nullsec was the sole source of the faucet and man those whiny brats should all be forced to just mine or build for their money whether they like to or not.

Yes, this is why trit is worth 6 isk/unit and other low ends are similarly more expensive. Because, you know, the supply is larger. That's how supply and demand works, right guys? Supply more of it and the price goes up?

You've got to have a reason for the amount of isk in the economy to actually matter; normally that's the price of goods and services. In other words, it is on topic.

... as long as none of them interfere with your cashflow?

Still putting words into my mouth, I see. Can you explain why you think players in nullsec should be forced only to mine and build for their income again? You sort of ignored that one. Here, let me quote it for you again.

man those whiny brats should all be forced to just mine or build for their money whether they like to or not.

As we're discussing the inflation of the economy it would make sense that the usual reduction in the price is negated by the increase in the amount of isk, reducing its value and therefore keeping prices up. Sarcasm not one of your strengths, obviously.

I didn't say that at all. I said turn off the artificial supplies of isk; the anomolies that appear magically due to infrastructure being deployed.

As for putting words into mouths ... priceless! I still submit that it makes no sense concord paying out bounties to players in nulsec, especially in the player-owned nulsec. You pay out the bounties, if that's what you want. Make your own economy instead of piggy-backing off empire space. That will reduce the amount of isk in the game, in a big way.

It will put a strain on the blue doughnut as resources will become a bone of contention. Not enough ice fields where you are? Go and take one from the opposition. Now THAT'S why most wars are fought and you ARE into PvP aren't you?

Anomalies appearing are like mission agents who have an unlimited quantities of missions, but this is EvE - an actual harsh and cruel universe would have Agents advertise for bids to take their jobs, and if someone else quotes less than you do to kill those blood raiders, well, they get the contracts.

this is what happens when a mechanical engineer argues with ecomonics major's isn't it

Had a good chuckle at this. I thought the economics majors would have been less uppity after 2008. At least when a mechanical engineer stuffs up all that Happens is the coal company gets 995TPH instead of 1000TPH

Had a good chuckle at this. I thought the economics majors would have been less uppity after 2008. At least when a mechanical engineer stuffs up all that collapses is a bridge...

That's a civil engineer. When a mechanical engineer stuffs up it's a 787 dreamliner or a ford pinto or something like that.

The Pinto was a wonderfully designed....



....bomb.

Had a good chuckle at this. I thought the economics majors would have been less uppity after 2008. At least when a mechanical engineer stuffs up all that collapses is a bridge...

Well, there is the saying that civil engineers design the targets and mechanical engineers design the bombs.