|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
396
   |
Posted - 2011.11.23 17:34:00 -
[1] - Quote
Should plex "bound to account" on ISK purchase from in game market?
In other words you could sell plex through in game market only once and the receiving account would be forced to turn it to either aurum or game time.
This would prevent any kind of market manipulation with the item and remove quite a load of worries about unused PLEXes from CCP.
|
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
416
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 17:19:00 -
[2] - Quote
You can add your plex to game time remotely from assets window no matter where it is.
In other words it is enough, if one of the characters in an account goes to corner of any region where plex is available in market. This has to be done only once in a month given that you buy only one plex at the time.
Sellers are still free to value their plex as they want and modify/cancel the sell orders.
Buyers are still free to set up buy orders or choose the place they buy their plex from.
Only real difference would be that when you do buy a plex, you commit to add it to your game time right away or later in the future. You will be unable to resell or redistribute that game time to anyone else or play market games with it.
|
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
416
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 19:10:00 -
[3] - Quote
Yeep wrote:Grey Stormshadow wrote:You will be unable to resell or redistribute that game time to anyone else or play market games with it.
Why is this desirable?
Because it is game time, not scourge missile.
|
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
417
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 22:35:00 -
[4] - Quote
MNagy wrote:Is it my understanding from the above posts that IF I wanted to make money on Veldspar,
I would buy a billion dollars worth of veldspar,
wait a few days
and then sell onto the market for a tad higher.
However,
It will not be permitted to buy 10 plexes - hold them till the prices goes up and then sell them?
Sandbox is a Sandbox - if you want to buy plex - you should have to pay market prices.
Even if there is some yahoo stocking up on all of them.
If I want to hold onto my melted nanoribbons for a month to make a profit - thats my choice, and the same choice ( my choice ) should be there to gobble up plex's and sell them whenever I want to sell them.
To complain that an item is too expensive in eve ( even if it is plex or any other type of item ) defeats the purpose of the sandbox idea.
I do not agree with the above suggestions ( if I am reading them correctly ) - as you are removing the 'free market' from the game. The very thing that makes the game.
What next - robotics / coolant / arkonor ?
Paranoid?
It doesn't remove free market. It removes ability to hold years of unused game time in single account just to make less game time available for others. It also removes huge problem from CCP when they can actually have solid statistics about accounts and amount of available game time binded to them. Makes future financial planning much easier.
Besides... you can not craft/collect game time in the sandbox so the item as a whole doesn't belong into sandbox.
Playing market games with such item can not be justified by any reasons related to "free sandbox environment".
Bind it to account when it is bought from in game market or traded between 2 accounts by any other means and the plex can properly serve it's purpose - and only the purpose - which it was originally made to fill.
|
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
417
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 00:08:00 -
[5] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:Grey Stormshadow wrote:It doesn't remove free market. It removes ability to hold years of unused game time in single account just to make less game time available for others. Holding PLEX in a hangar does not diminish the supply of PLEX. Check the PLEX devblog. Grey Stormshadow wrote:Bind it to account when it is bought from in game market or traded between 2 accounts by any other means and the plex can properly serve it's purpose - and only the purpose - which it was originally made to fill.
The purpose that PLEX was originally made to fill was to be a market-tradable item to allow the market to decide the value of game time. The format that you are suggesting is exactly the original GTC model: trade once on the forums, game time is automatically applied to the account that paid ISK for the code.
Agreed, except that the trade is done directly through in-game market and you can easily decide when you want to apply the game time you have bought. Seller can still set the price, move the plex around in new eden or take it out from market. He can even contract it or make an auction in local. Only difference is that once it changes account, it stays on account where it went. This doesn't limit free trade. It just changes the item from "piece of paper" to "non refundable game time" or "service" if that makes it easier to understand.
Again... you can not create this "game time" inside New Eden. Any unnecessary trading with such item can not be good for the sand box economy.
Mara Rinn wrote:
Any complaint about PLEX being too expensive for some individual to buy in order to play for free is irrelevant. The value of PLEX is determined by the people who have the spare ISK lying around to be able to afford to throw it away on 30 days of game time. This is a subscription based game: getting to play for "free" by spending in-game currency is a perk enjoyed by the in-game rich.
Those of you trying to fund game time by buying PLEX with ISK are directly competing with people who play the game to make the ISK to buy the PLEX to play the game (the "play to pay" crowd). If you are having trouble raising the ISK to buy a PLEX each month, check out the Making ISK guide for some ideas. In the meantime acknowledge that if you aren't committing your gaming time to making ISK, you are falling further behind the PLEX affordability curve.
PLEX do not exist to allow you to buy game time with an amount of ISK that you can afford.
Unrelevant argument. You're confusing affordability, subscription, funding methods and pilots personal wealth to discussion about binding game time to account on purchase. That is also called derailing the actual issue.
|
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
417
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 01:04:00 -
[6] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:Grey Stormshadow wrote:Unrelevant argument. You're confusing affordability, subscription, funding methods and pilots personal wealth to discussion about binding game time to account on purchase. That is also called derailing the actual issue. You're confusing PLEX with game time. That's the actual issue. PLEX are a tradable commodity, just like scourge missiles. Game time is not tradable: once it's applied to your account you can't sell it to someone else for ISK. PLEX can be used to impact the game, just like scourge missiles can be used to impact the game.
That is exactly my point. How can "service", in this case "game time" be an "item" what you can use to impact sand box game.
The goal of PLEX is to give someone possibility to pay someone else's game time and gain in game currency in the trade. There is really no need to add any more variables to the equation.
If you want play more complex market games, there is plenty of real in game items available.
Only _direct_ supply and demand should apply to plex price and that happens if there is no "investors" in the equation.
|
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
417
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 01:29:00 -
[7] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:Grey Stormshadow wrote:This would prevent any kind of market manipulation with the item and remove quite a load of worries about unused PLEXes from CCP. Why is market manipulation a concern?
- Because people make profit by trading with "service", an imaginary item which can not be generated in game but what some individuals still need to stay on-line.
- Because plex can not be generated in game, normal in-game supply and demand rules do not apply.
- Because supply is limited and not in-game dependant only way to guarantee that supply/demand price stays in "correct" level is to keep investors out from the equation.
- Because X amount of unused plex end up to some random hangar where they may be next 5 years and no-one know will they fund X amount of separate currently subscribed active accounts in the future or are they potentially gone for good. CCP has very hard time trying to predict how many subscriptions they will keep/loose because of this.
I can not find any positive thing market manipulation could do to this service, except increase the wallet size of people who try to justify the case.
|
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
419
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 13:02:00 -
[8] - Quote
It is quite hilarious how the discussion always goes towards "can't afford the isk" - "prices rise" - "should consider subbing", even the actual reasoning has nothing to do with the current plex price level. It has somewhat to do with questioning is the current plex price level reflecting the true value of it or has it been manipulated by investors.
Personally I would not have any problem buying my game time with 1 billion isk/month. However I've made personal calculations and come to conclusion, that paying over 400m from plex is turning myself to tool, so I rather pay with credit card and have no problem with that either.
However I still feel that plex is not actual in game item what should be used for market games. It is nothing like "scourge missile" or "primae" as someone referred earlier, because you can not control the supply in game.
Plex should bound to account when it changes ownership from account x to account y. It is a service - game time - thing what appears from thin air. You should not be able to make trade profit by investing to thin air. When you buy game time, you should commit to use it in some point. It is that simple.
|
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
419
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 16:20:00 -
[9] - Quote
Perhaps you should learn to understand what you're reading, before trying to throw any answers.
|
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
420
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 19:01:00 -
[10] - Quote
Those who believe that binding is bad idea only because it would prevent using 1 "jita"-alt to obtain game time for several accounts, could be rounded by setting for example 24h timer to plex before it binds to account after it has changed owner 1st time. During this period you could still contract or trade that plex forward, but you could not put it back to market.
That way you could still buy and contract your plex forward, but playing market games would be done deal.
I don't understand what is the reason to be so negative about this. You guys commit to game time when you buy for example 3 month subscription. Why should it be different in the game? Only the currency is different brand.
|
|
|
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
420
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 20:14:00 -
[11] - Quote
Is it?
How interesting. Care to share the facts behind this assumption?
|
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
456
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 16:20:00 -
[12] - Quote
There is plenty of items to play market PVP with. Plex is the only one which should remain clear from that for the reasons I've already mentioned in my previous posts.
|
|
|
| |
|