Should plex "bound to account" on ISK purchase from in game market?

...

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.

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.

You'd also reopen the doors to RMT people. Patience is a very rare commodity online.

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.

How would not being able to re-sell a PLEX after buying it on the in-game market make RMT people more active ?

Remember that for everybody buying PLEX to fund their account there's somebody selling PLEX to fund their PvP (or whatever) habbit.

If you can get more ISK for your Dollar/Euro/Pound from RMT people because CCP removes supply demand mechanics from the in game market (which is what not allowing resale does) you make that option attractive to people.

If $30 gets you 700 million legally (back when PLEX was 350ish) and 1 billion illegal through RMT to some people (not me btw) the risk of a ban becomes worth it.

And now for a controversial statement; I think the interest of the people spending real world money should way heavier then the interest of people wanting to play for free. *zips up her flameproof suit*

Every player's opinion is valid, if they didn't play then they aren't bringing in money to CCP. Sure you may not be paying out of pocket to play if you purchase PLEX, but somebody else is so you are still a valid customer.

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.

I disagree with this in one a bit.

I have 2 paid by (cash) not isk accounts with eve ( i dont plex ) but I will let you know my issue below:

1 toon is the moneymaker and the other toon ist he industrialist/do all the redundant stuff.

I sometimes get toonB to purchase things for toonA or vice versa depending on where they are in the universe.

If the above suggested was to take place - it obsoletes my dummy toon for doing all the things in eve I hate (flying somewhere to buy stuff).

So you still need to "LINK" multiple accounts together.

Wouldn't you just transfer the ISK instead of the PLEX in this scenario?

Wouldn't you just transfer the ISK instead of the PLEX in this scenario?

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. (edit)

I do not remember broad opposition to PLEX in any recent discussions. Is it really an issue? If not, leave as is.

It depends where the toon is.

I could have ToonA in Jita, and ToonB in Rens.
One of them will buy an item for the other.
When they meet up by days end - items are flip flopped.

So the 'person' who bought it - itsnt ALWAYS the person who used it.

Many times ToonA is missioning while ToonB is sent around the galaxy to pick up items for me and for any other members in corp.

This scenario becomes more apparent when you spend your time and live in wormholes more often.
Many times 1 buyer (since they are going out anyway) is given a shopping list.

That's why you have 3 toons per account. To have them somewhere to inject plex to the account.

No I have 2 toons on 2 accounts.
As i said, I don't plex and don't intend to. But if I click on one toon and buy a plex and can't use it on my other toon on the other account I'd be peed.

I should not be forced to travel 30 jumps with the 'purchasing' toon "just because".

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.

+1 EXCELLENT idea

Thank you.

As said above this would be a significant disadvantage for people who don't have access to market hubs. ATM I can keep 1 alt on one account in The Forge and buy PLEX for all my accounts.

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.

Should plex "bound to account" on ISK purchase from in game market?

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 ?

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.

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.

^This. Wild fluctuations in plex prices = unstable player base = bad for CCP's bottom line.

Holding PLEX in a hangar does not diminish the supply of PLEX. Check the PLEX devblog.



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.

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.

This would prevent any kind of market manipulation with the item and remove quite a load of worries about unused PLEXes from CCP.

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.

The goal of PLEX is to give someone possibility to pay someone else's game time and gain in game currency in the trade.

Only _direct_ supply and demand should apply to plex price and that happens if there is no "investors" in the equation.

Why is market manipulation a concern?

Wild fluctuations in plex prices = unstable player base = bad for CCP's bottom line.

PLEX is an item just like any other item in EVE. CCP has made it very clear back when they made them transportable and destructible. The only difference from veldspar or scourge missiles is the way in which it enters the game. After a PLEX is redeemed, it is mechanically indistinguishable from any other item. In that regard it is no different from, say, a Primae.


I liked the part where you provided proof, or at least reasons for believing so.

If I mission for 3 years straight and save up all my isk,
isnt it my right to do with it what I please?

If I want to buy 100 plex and hold onto them - thats my choice - not yours.
I earned that isk like you did and how I spend my time with my isk is nobody elses choice but mine.

If you are complaining that its not as 'cheap' to play for free becaues your plex is now more expensive, is your problem and your tears.

You may still buy 100 plex and hold onto them... in the form of added gametime on your account. You simple lose the ability to throw out those 100 plex at a later time, which would be a problem for CCP. Wild fluctuations = players quit game when it's high, then potentially crash later. It's in CCP's interest to keep plex stable. The thing rose by 100 mil the past week, then dropped 50 mil in the past 3 days.

It's in CCP's interest to keep plex stable.

[quote=Goose99]. A lot of people have been using PLEX to pay for their accounts, and seem to have developed a sense of entitlement. They expect PLEX to remain at a price that is suitable for them, rather than the seller...

Btw high prices doesnt mean more plexes are sold , if somebody wants to by a supercapital from plexes, he needs to sell less plexes if the plex price increase relative to supercap...

If this were true, CCP would peg the PLEX price at 1 ISK, and make $225 billion every time someone wants to use GTC to buy a supercarrier. EVE would have millions, maybe billions, of subscribed accounts, all subbed up to the end of the century and beyond.

My God - you're some kind of economic genius!

SOMEONE GET HILMAR TO READ THIS THREAD, NAOMI HAS JUST SAVED CCP WITH HER INSIGHT!

- 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.

Well if you're going to imply that the supply of PLEX is inelastic with price, you should maybe reconsider whether you're the one who gets to ask other people not to be idiots.

So the real question is: what is the equilibrium price at which the most PLEX are created. I'll assume that this is the "right" price, as it allows the most number of people to play for free, and makes CCP the most money, and it's ipso facto the best price for the people who pay the money to create them as well (in terms of how much money they're willing to pay)

If the ISK price is low, then people have to buy more PLEX to buy a specific item, but they're less likely to do so.

If the ISK price is high, then people have to buy fewer PLEX to afford their Aeon or whatever, but they're more likely to do so.

I know that I personally was watching the PLEX price rise with interest, and I in fact made a decision that if they hit 600M, I would work a day of overtime and make some PLEX to sell for enough ISK that I wouldn't have to PvE for a year or so. I had no specific purchase in mind.

Unless CCP tell us how many PLEX are being created, then any attempt to say that the PLEX price is "too high" (or "too low") is, at the end of the day, just based on personal perspective and undiluted guessing. (This might be an interesting question for the CSM to put to CCP.)

So you write the same thing as i wrote. Thats something.
It is all up to CCP , so I dont even understand why there is such a topic as this , as it has no real reason, other than some ppl wants lower plex prices somehow.

stuff

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.

Perhaps you should learn to understand what you're reading, before trying to throw any answers.

No, its pretty clear you think PLEX are too expensive and the evil, soulless market players are to blame.

Everyone of you seem to be unable to distinguish the difference between "high" and "unstable." High is when plex price climb sturdily, as it did for years. Unstable is when plex rose by 100 mil in a week, then fell by 50 mil in 3 days, which is what happened recently. The spikes prompt people to leave, the dips put a dampener on plex purchases. Wild fluctuations is never a good thing for the economy. What makes it unacceptable for plex is that wild fluctuations in subscription prices translates directly to fluctuations in subscription base.

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.

This is a game and that means all of it is 100% thin air, all of it.

EVE existed before PLEX. PLEX is a EULA friendly form of RMT. No one is being forced to buy or sell them.

CCP gets their pound of flesh from their players as every month is still paid for with real money, they just get a lot more prepaid time is all.

In game supply is easily controlled. Don't buy them in game or out.

People could be paying a lot less for concerts and sporting events if they would just be patient and stop buying those things for a while and let the price come down.

Fact is, despite all the crying to rob the carebears to feed the nullbears, there is a TON of ISK floating around, just look at PLEX prices...

Everyone of you seem to be unable to distinguish the difference between "high" and "unstable." High is when plex price climb sturdily, as it did for years. Unstable is when plex rose by 100 mil in a week, then fell by 50 mil in 3 days, which is what happened recently. The spikes prompt people to leave, the dips put a dampener on plex purchases. Wild fluctuations is never a good thing for the economy. What makes it unacceptable for plex is that wild fluctuations in subscription prices translates directly to fluctuations in subscription base.

Subscription price must remain stable

The fact that it dropped by 50 mil in 3 days actually does more damage than it rising 100 mil a week prior.

Subscription price must remain stable

Everyone of you seem to be unable to distinguish the difference between "high" and "unstable." High is when plex price climb sturdily, as it did for years. Unstable is when plex rose by 100 mil in a week, then fell by 50 mil in 3 days, which is what happened recently. The spikes prompt people to leave, the dips put a dampener on plex purchases. Wild fluctuations is never a good thing for the economy. What makes it unacceptable for plex is that wild fluctuations in subscription prices translates directly to fluctuations in subscription base.

If you can't deal with a 100 million isk per month difference in your wallet, you shouldn't be plexing yet.

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.

PLEX PROBLEM = PRICE


PLEX is the safeguard to RMT, but RMT is nothing more than botting

If CCP Focuses on removing botting, than those few leftover RMT'ers will have no impact on CCP balance score

No, the goal of PLEX is to allow the player-driven market to determine an ISK price for the real-world value embodied in this virtual commodity. That real-world value is approx. Gé¼17, not 30 days of game time.

A lot of people have been using PLEX to pay for their accounts, and seem to have developed a sense of entitlement. They expect PLEX to remain at a price that is suitable for them, rather than the seller.

Any change to PLEX and I just won't buy them anymore. Hope that is clear enough CCP, and CSM