Three words:

Player Driven Economy.

Yes but try buying a 150-300 mil ship unfitted no less, when you're a new player who doesn't know how to make any ISK. I've explained this to new players I've met and was almost apologetic about the high costs. I think alot of T1 ships have very expensive to very ridiculous costs.

A "New player" shouldn't be buying the most expensive t1 subcapital ships in the game.

Prices have always been in flux. They did not always used to be as low as they were pre-tiericide. I think the fact that t1 ships have a meaningful cost is good for game balance. Remember back when the smallest thing people seriously flew for PVP was a battlecruiser?

Despite not even naming a ship the cost wasn't for a sub-capital at all

Honestly After years of playing EVE even with the new-ish tutorial that came out a while back. To me EVE is less new player friendly than ever. You know how hard it is to convince people I know to play this game? Very, often ending in failure.

With the summer expansion not that far away, the EVE economy is going to take a serious hit.

With the summer expansion not that far away, the EVE economy is going to take a serious hit.

With Ship prices climbing all the time and the ship skill rebalance will make already expensive ships in much higher demand.

First time I bought a Charon it cost 680 mil, a raven about 100 mil. Ah the good old days Haha.

economic "solution" = screw some people over to help other people in an attempt to fix an imaginary problem dreamed up by people that feel entitled.

With the summer expansion not that far away, the EVE economy is going to take a serious hit.

With Ship prices climbing all the time and the ship skill rebalance will make already expensive ships in much higher demand.

What's going to be done to adjust this? Will ship building costs go down to compensate or general money making things in EVE from bounties to rewards go up?

First time I bought a Charon it cost 680 mil, a raven about 100 mil. Ah the good old days Haha.

The only way to combat inflation in eve is to increase these sinks or come up with new ones.

With the summer expansion not that far away, the EVE economy is going to take a serious hit.

With Ship prices climbing all the time and the ship skill rebalance will make already expensive ships in much higher demand.

What's going to be done to adjust this? Will ship building costs go down to compensate or general money making things in EVE from bounties to rewards go up?

First time I bought a Charon it cost 680 mil, a raven about 100 mil. Ah the good old days Haha.

When your ship explodes, the only isk to leave the game is the isk paid for the manufacturing slot (which is negligible).

CCP talked last year about being concerned with inflation, however.

Tons of new isk is being generatrd through NPC bounties and mission rewards.
There are not enough isk sinks in the game to combat this.

When your ship explodes, the only isk to leave the game is the isk paid for the manufacturing slot (which is negligible)

Isk sinks currently include War dec costs, expired insurace fees, broker fees, market taxes (not corp tax), office rental, ship repair, locator agents. Etc.

The only way to combat inflation in eve is to increase these sinks or come up with new ones.

No. The isk lost is the amount you could have gotten for all the materials that went into building that ship, a percentage cost of the blueprint if it's a copy and anything the loot fairy claims for her dragon's horde of items.

Else you're saying I can build any ship in the game for the cost of a manufacturing slot, which is silly.

What Gallifreyan's talking about is the ISK which leaves the game. The fact the isk left you doesn't matter, it's where it went.

You know how hard it is to convince people I know to play this game? Very, often ending in failure.

EVE has never had a high retention rate.

economic "solution" = screw some people over to help other people in an attempt to fix an imaginary problem dreamed up by people that feel entitled.

With the summer expansion not that far away, the EVE economy is going to take a serious hit.

With Ship prices climbing all the time and the ship skill rebalance will make already expensive ships in much higher demand.

What's going to be done to adjust this? Will ship building costs go down to compensate or general money making things in EVE from bounties to rewards go up?

First time I bought a Charon it cost 680 mil, a raven about 100 mil. Ah the good old days Haha.

That describes most of the 'solutions' proposed on the forums!!

The only way to combat inflation in eve is to increase these sinks or come up with new ones.

ships are still to cheap seeing how easy it is to replace them and how easy it is to make isk.

Inflation is caused by an increase in the supply of money.

Yes but try buying a 150-300 mil ship unfitted no less, when you're a new player who doesn't know how to make any ISK. I've explained this to new players I've met and was almost apologetic about the high costs. I think alot of T1 ships have very expensive to very ridiculous costs.

With the summer expansion not that far away, the EVE economy is going to take a serious hit.

With Ship prices climbing all the time and the ship skill rebalance will make already expensive ships in much higher demand.

What's going to be done to adjust this? Will ship building costs go down to compensate or general money making things in EVE from bounties to rewards go up?

First time I bought a Charon it cost 680 mil, a raven about 100 mil. Ah the good old days Haha.

While there is some inflation in Eve, it's not what's responsible for the increase in prices you're prattling on about.

Mineral prices are up because mineral supply is down.

Inflationary price increases would yield an increase in prices across the board. We're mostly seeing price increases where the bulk of the cost is in minerals.

Looked at T3 prices lately?

You're completely ignoring some extremely huge changes in the supply/demand curve, so your position is ultimately a naively informed one.

While there is some inflation in Eve, it's not what's responsible for the increase in prices you're prattling on about.

Mineral prices are up because mineral supply is down.

Inflationary price increases would yield an increase in prices across the board. We're mostly seeing price increases where the bulk of the cost is in minerals.

Looked at T3 prices lately?

You're completely ignoring some extremely huge changes in the supply/demand curve, so your position is ultimately a naively informed one.

People are comparing it to how long it takes for a newb to get ship X or Y etc .


If you've played eve from around the start you'd know T1 ships are MUCH faster obtained now even with the huge increase of purchase cost.

Don't remind me, it took so long to get a cruiser.

But the up side was you thought it was something special when you finally got it

Yet you took it for a spin into null without a blink ...

It has a very high retention rate for those who enjoy it, and those are the ones who matter.

Yes but try buying a 150-300 mil ship unfitted no less, when you're a new player who doesn't know how to make any ISK. I've explained this to new players I've met and was almost apologetic about the high costs. I think alot of T1 ships have very expensive to very ridiculous costs.

Yes but try buying a 150-300 mil ship unfitted no less, when you're a new player who doesn't know how to make any ISK. I've explained this to new players I've met and was almost apologetic about the high costs. I think alot of T1 ships have very expensive to very ridiculous costs.

Actually I took it into lo-sec and someone was kind enough to show me the error of my ways, but I did learn that being pod killed was a fast way back home.

Actually in a game environment like eve where they have changed the supply of minerals (removing gun mining, altering mining barges) will have a large effect on mineral prices so no one good or set of goods are specific to inflation, which is why in countries they measure inflation over a large number of items. And if you look at minerals as a whole they have always trended upwards over time, excluding the last few months.

And at the end of the day I will except what Dr. Eyj+¦lfur Gu+¦mundsson said on the matter last year, that it was a concern and that they needed to find new isk sinks.

So my naivety is backed by an economist, whats your position backed by?

CCP talked last year about being concerned with inflation, however.

Tons of new isk is being generatrd through NPC bounties and mission rewards.
There are not enough isk sinks in the game to combat this.

When your ship explodes, the only isk to leave the game is the isk paid for the manufacturing slot (which is negligible)

Isk sinks currently include War dec costs, expired insurace fees, broker fees, market taxes (not corp tax), office rental, ship repair, locator agents. Etc.

The only way to combat inflation in eve is to increase these sinks or come up with new ones.

What he said and what you said are only loosely related.

This is a common feature of the Eve Online chicken-little whinge post.

Unlike your post, his fanfest talk very specifically included the supply/demand curve shifts in addition to money supply (as well as other factors, like speculation).

His conclusion was, "Yeah, we'll continue to keep an eye on things."

Your conclusion was, "AMG the Eveconermy is gunna asplode!!11!1!"

Anyways, I don't see inflation being as bad as some people make it out to be. And most economists agree that inflation is preferable to deflation where prices fall and people produce less.

There is a giant white elephant in the Odyssey Announcement calls Spacescape that talks about a full rebalance of all regions from high to null and change to industrial resources.

Tell me what that means, and MAYBE we can speculate as to possible market effects post Odyssey.


Until we get at least a hint what CCP is talking about with this Spacescape stuff, I have NO IDEA what June will bring.



Come on CCP! We're waiting!

As to "AMG the Eveconermy is gunna asplode!!11!1!" I think we can safely say only you would say something that stupid.

With the summer expansion not that far away, the EVE economy is going to take a serious hit.

[
You could reduce inflation by adding more sinks, but you could reduce inflation by having more players who invariably buy and sell more products which in turn speeds up the rate of current isk sinks with taxes and broker fees.

Also having more players also means more insurance purchases (which are sinks over time) and more war decs which sink money of course.

Alternatively, having more players will result in some of those players being material side production as more people become miners producing more minerals effectively driving down prices.

Or you could just discourage missioning and encourage mining resulting in less isk being generated and more material wealth being created.

Anyways, I don't see inflation being as bad as some people make it out to be. And most economists agree that inflation is preferable to deflation where prices fall and people produce less.

You just said it on the very first page.

This is garden variety fearmongering nonsense.

I'll say what I said before: Show your work or **** off.

Have you noticed the price of tech? what do you think that means?

So you're saying Ken 1138 is Frying Doom?

Unless something drastic happens to mining mechanics there always be a certain small ratio of miners compared to the general population due to how boring most perceive it to be.

Every expansion, some internet space prophet shows up to declare that the end of the economy is nigh. Like a good little doomsday prepper, I do what I can to be ready for it...

...and then the damn thing doesn't die.

Anyone want to buy 15 billion worth of exotic dancers, frozen food, and holoreels?

What you SHOULD have explained was the first rule of eve: Don't fly what you can't afford to lose.

Fortunately, grinding missions is just as tedious//enjoyable and boring/relaxing as mining, depending on your perspective.

But, as you say, the equilibrium between ratting potential profit and mining potential profit breaks down as soon as the available of minerals limit is hit.


If mining is more profitable than ratting, I'm mine, assuming there are rocks in belts to be mined. Run out of rocks, relative profit is out the window and I'm off ratting instead of mining. Don't run out of missions like we do rocks.

If CCP do their job properly sometime the next few years, then there'll be a sizeable chunk of players who'll go outside of hisec to mine.

No. The isk lost is the amount you could have gotten for all the materials that went into building that ship, a percentage cost of the blueprint if it's a copy and anything the loot fairy claims for her dragon's horde of items.

Else you're saying I can build any ship in the game for the cost of a manufacturing slot, which is silly.

Three words:

Player Driven Economy.

So what's the point in owning it in the first place?

What do you mean whats the point of owning it in the first place? The point is whatever you had planned for it. What kind of stupid question is that?

We need more roids.

The spawn rates and sizes of the roids are getting to be too small for the economy in highsec. Every other half decent 0.5 system I've found all have a small fleet of organized miners in corps that regularly wipe several belts clean.

Good. Hopefully that will pressure miners to start moving outwards.

I own X that I plan to use for Y, but I can't afford to lose it. So I guess I should never fly it for now. And if you're going to say, "Then don't buy it if you know you won't be able to afford to lose it" then the "rule" should change to "Don't buy what you can't afford to lose."

outwards to where?

It's the same quote with 2 different ways of saying it. Cultural thing, some people say pop, some say soda.

Outwards to 0.6 and up? It's not like there's a shortage of minable systems, and it's not like the income will be that much lower.

Really, now? Because I always assumed the quote meant to never take it out of hangar until you were sure you could risk it.

With the summer expansion not that far away, the EVE economy is going to take a serious hit.

With Ship prices climbing all the time and the ship skill rebalance will make already expensive ships in much higher demand.

What's going to be done to adjust this? Will ship building costs go down to compensate or general money making things in EVE from bounties to rewards go up?

First time I bought a Charon it cost 680 mil, a raven about 100 mil. Ah the good old days Haha.

And some aren't ready even if they can afford it.

[quote=Tippia]

income between 0.7 and 0.5 is exactly the same, they contain identical ores.

in fact, if you're cherry picking scordite my sources are informing me that everywhere is equally profitable in high security space.
see.

outwards to where?

You are neglecting 'roid size, lost half cycles, time it takes to move to a new belt, etc.

0.5 is more profitable because the rocks are larger and regrow faster, so fewer half cycles and less repositioning from belt to belt..

Really, now? Because I always assumed the quote meant to never take it out of hangar until you were sure you could risk it.

mining is already poorly paid without being "forced" in to lower income areas of space.

You are neglecting 'roid size, lost half cycles, time it takes to move to a new belt, etc.

0.5 is more profitable because the rocks are larger and regrow faster, so fewer half cycles and less repositioning from belt to belt.

Well ...
... too bad most miners (not you!) don't understand that more miners lead to less income ... ^_^

If you want prices to go down, make the crap yourself... the BPO's for all T1 things are still the same price as they were 5or 9 years ago ( not sure about 9 but anyways ).

mine, research, make your own ship. if you want it now, pay the isk... its about the same 'cost' of time invested to aquire the ship yourself via mining > manufacturing > riding then it is to mission > go to market > buy ship

L2EVE

Ok so I see you have no idea what inflation is.


Yes the isk sink that is BPOs is still in existence and they only recently got a small price hike.

Inflation is all about purchasing power, now items them selves such as ships will rise and fall on a supply and demand curve due to the amount of miners vs pvp players, but the amount of buying power people have for shooting a red x or the fact that the cost of those BPOs compared to buying power is now laughable.

So here is the easy version for you,big inflation = bad.

Here is the easy version for you! Inflation is not bad for miners (unless they are buying T2, then moon goo inflation sucks, but mineral inflation cancels this out).

Heck, I find inflation to be a good thing when I have to mine fewer hours to buy skill books, buy BPOs, rent NPC manufacturing and research slots, pay my corp office rents, etc.

Inflation may be bad for people shooting red +, but not so much for the people selling to the people shooting the red +. Maybe you should switch. It may even lower the inflation. Just don't mine the rocks in the systems where I likes to mine.

I don't see inflation in EVE as a major problem now, what I see is the distribution of the wealth being too strong towards the older players.

Noob income from lvl 1 missions, mining in ventures and salvaging is too low to maintain even cheap RVB PVP going in a sustainable way.

The end result is a rush for lvl 3 missions in Drakes and mining barges. You have to grow fast your skills in carebear activities and leave the important PVP skills behind as you can't afford lose 5 or 6 millions ISK a day in tackle frigates.

The end result is a long stretch of time doing a boring activities better done solo then doing some cheap PVP with friends which would be fun for everyone.

Nothing of this touch manufacturing that also need top skills to be competitive, which in a noob point of view takes ages just to be on par, not better, than establish players.

There are several ways to make ISK in EVE, but apart from trading in a trade hub, they all require what noobs don't have: skill points, advanced in game knowledge or good reliable friends. Not to mention that they are all boring, like chores that you have to do so you can enjoy the fun parts.

Odyssey might have a fix for that in the new exploration system, but only if in order to be competitive I won't need a tengu from the start.

Main problem is how to adjust that without stepping in the Malcani's law.

inb4 goons wreck Jita again, and makes everything go **** expensive.

I believe that is what economists refer to as seasonally adjusted

I think it's what economists call GÇ£stop sniffing glue, you're hallucinatingGÇ¥.

I think it's what economists call GÇ£stop sniffing glue, you're hallucinatingGÇ¥.

So what exactly do you want us to blow up/distroy now?

Three words:

Player Driven Economy.

Yes but try buying a 150-300 mil ship unfitted no less, when you're a new player who doesn't know how to make any ISK. I've explained this to new players I've met and was almost apologetic about the high costs. I think alot of T1 ships have very expensive to very ridiculous costs.

Now while to High an inflation rate is a bed thing and an isk sink would be good, there is probably a reason why inflation has been allowed to remain this high for this long.

Bounties.

Yep the number 1 isk faucet, is also a reason why it has been left for so so long, as you kill a red x, you get a payout but that payout is fixed, so the longer it is left the less those payout are actually worth.

But personally I feel we have waited long enough and would like to see the inflation rate lowered via a large isk sink. Namely the increase of costs to NPC facilities.

Lets face it if it continues much longer, miners and manufacturers will be fine but anyone collecting bounties or selling items on an NPC buy order will start to feel the pinch, if they are not already doing so. Considering what you can buy for killing a red cross is so much less now than it was 2 years ago.

Surely the price of minerals comes down to how much Miners think their time is worth...? It's just labour costs, the minerals don't cost anything to extract (discounting set-up price for the ship/fit and skills etc.). If people wanted to stop inflation, surely the best way would not be to have CCP externally impose something, but rather have the Player-Driven-Economy sort it by itself. A group of more selfless miners selling for lower than everyone else, so that other miners similarly have to reduce their prices to not lose out?

EDIT: As for bounties, if you changed it so the bounty payout is much less but the drops are much better, wouldn't that go some way to countering inflation...? Instead of generating free money it generates a sellable item.

CCP talked last year about being concerned with inflation, however.

Tons of new isk is being generatrd through NPC bounties and mission rewards.
There are not enough isk sinks in the game to combat this.

When your ship explodes, the only isk to leave the game is the isk paid for the manufacturing slot (which is negligible)

Isk sinks currently include War dec costs, expired insurace fees, broker fees, market taxes (not corp tax), office rental, ship repair, locator agents. Etc.

The only way to combat inflation in eve is to increase these sinks or come up with new ones.

Three words:

Player Driven Economy.

2 phrases:

1.) Sandbox
2.) Player driven (controlled)

CCP should not feel the need to do anything but stay out of the way and let the players handle ( or not ) inflation. To do otherwise is to violate the principle of the sandbox and a player controlled economy.

Creating artificial isk sinks is both unnecessary and a violation of the sandbox promise by CCP, by creating isk sinks and the like CCP is deliberately attempting to control what is supposed to be a player driven marketplace.

Just my opinion feel free to have your own.

Yes but try buying a 150-300 mil ship unfitted no less, when you're a new player who doesn't know how to make any ISK. I've explained this to new players I've met and was almost apologetic about the high costs. I think alot of T1 ships have very expensive to very ridiculous costs.

CCP should stop making or modifying content. And make all ships have infinite fitting.

Sandbox.

... waits for the self-entitled "Y Gen" brats of EVE to get off their CQ couches and make some effort. Just a bit... a smidge... crack a sweat, even.

The biggest problem with inflation is actually to do with money you previously made.

Say you earned a million isk, for which you can buy for example an iteron III (Honestly I don't know the price atm) now if you do not continue to earn more isk, via whatever, in 12 months time you will not be able to buy that ship.

Inflation decreases the value of money previously earned, unless it is rolled into a commodity that is subsequently effected by inflation.

I agree with your assessment, but... why is this bad?

Inflation in the real world means that it is generally unwise to just sit on cash... you need to invest it in something, so it will retain it's relative value. In Eve it is harder, but...

The old why is inflation bad question.

Well 1%-3% inflation is generally seen as a good thing as it means the market is growing, but in an economy with fixed wages such as ratting or mission running, it will mean that over time these things will be worth less per hour compared to commodities.

For example with a 1% inflation rate this means that a person earning 15 million isk per hour will in a years time effectively be earning, 14,850,000 isk for the same task next year. That is not to bad it means that with their fixed income they are losing 150,000 isk per hour, not great but not devastating.

Now assume we have a 10% inflation rate that same person will be losing the buying power of 1.5 million an hour, the following year.

Now being this is a game...

...The only way to combat inflation in eve is to increase these sinks or come up with new ones.

Since miners don't actually get paid in ISK, but in inflation adjusted products... do you consider inflation to affect their earnings per hour? Is this just directly related to those that are get a fixed 'ISK' income: mission runners, ratters, etc?

The only way? Wouldn't reducing the material requirement for modules and ships by 50% cause those prices to fail over time?

Are you not really talking about currency depreciation?

[quote=Bi-Mi Lansatha][quote=Frying Doom]
But miners as they are only supply and demand would only be slightly directly effected by inflation.

Three words:

Player Driven Economy.

Currency depreciation is a currencies value in comparison to another currency, for example the USD depreciated compared to the AUD over the last few years. It is now worth less than it used to be.

The first you are talking about production cost savings, that would not effect inflation

Doesn't this also apply to some others? Pirates/Gankers are rewarded not in ISK, but in 'goods'. Those that 'Mine Moons' or have Planetary Interaction are also... in essence... part of a 'Barter Economy'. My 5760 units of Precious Metals a day that I get 'paid' remain the same regardless of inflation. I would expect that in a cycle of currency depreciation, I would get more ISK as the currency loses value.

Adding ISK to the system should decrease its value, but for a number of players who get paid in goods... is this really inflationary to them? Are miners and such actually having to work longer hours to acquire the same goods... due to currency depreciation?

"The rate at which the general level of prices for goods and services is rising, and, subsequently, purchasing power is falling."

Cutting the requirements should lead to a massive decrease in inflation.. prices would go down. One time. If they wanted to stretch it out they could reduce requirements annually... 5%. An ISK in this year would actually be worth more next year... I could buy more.

...for example hyper inflation in Germany in 1923 so so bad that if you got paid in the evening, if you waited till morning to do your shopping, the money was not enough to buy a loaf of bread.

Goods you produce on the day you produce them are not effected by inflation and with inflation, if you hold the goods the buying power does not change, the change is when you sell the goods and the currency is effected by inflation.

This is due to the fact that currency is an idea, it is not backed by anything at all. It is just 1s and 0s floating around.

Are we not comparing the value of ISK paid for some jobs with the value of an alternate currency paid for other jobs.

I am in German, so good example. A very bad time for those who were paid in German 'Marks' for their labor, but here in Bavaria... lots of people weren't working for 'Marks', but instead for farm goods/products. Their true value was little changed. An apple was still an apple. Germans who had real valued goods could and did barter and trade for what they needed.

Hyper-inflation in EvE might break those who are paid in the fiat currency ISK for their labor, but those paid in real products/hard currency will notice much less effect. In Eve the effect will be 'Good Money' chasing out the bad: people will switch to doing things that pay well.

Inflation is governed by the availability of money within an economy and the only way to slow it sufficiently within the EvE economy is to remove almost as much isk as you are putting in there are no other ways.

...
No we are comparing isk/hr between different jobs, not different currencies.

...As it is possible to inflate the barter cost of an apple by creating a shortage or making them a treasured item, such as the tulip bulb bubble.

Not necessarily. It should protect the value of ISK it doesn't have to have any effect on inflation. The money supply in the US has risen a large amount in the last few year, but inflation has not followed. Demand Driven Inflation is usually a more pressing concern.

Didn't the Goons do this with one of their Moon Products? I believe OPEC did it with oil also.

Miners are not paid in ISK... the receive in effect flat rate pay based on skills and equipment. Their pay can be calculated out per hour... it isn't in ISK.

When ISK is devalued through its expansion, those paid in ISK make less. The effect on miner paid in something else is little affected.

Nice discussion. Is ok if we leave it here?

Why should anything be done?

Cause it further divides the gap between the haves and the have nots. A newb today has to work much much harder to get the isk for a bs than say a year ago.

I'd be curious to see price charts for trit, pyer, and all core minerals from the start, and all new minerals or production materials from their introduction. Considering that someone was recently doing a Chicken Little routine over a trit price crash, and others gripe over the ISK/hour of mining scordite (as pyer is evidently in short supply, elevating prices), my guess is that prices are constantly fluctuating.

On that I must agree inflation of 1-3% PA is the preferable range. Deflation is almost never preferable.

It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a 'dismal science.' But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.