|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6578
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 00:06:44 -
[1] - Quote
Ralph Shepard wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:Hi Space Friends, Coming with our release on Tuesday, weGÇÖre significantly reducing the damage output of Fighters. Why:We are making this change because Carriers & Supercarriers are too strong in PvE, specifically anomaly ratting in Nullsec. As you may have seen in the May Monthly Economy Report, there is a significant upward trend in the Money Supply. This is primarily due to NPC Bounties. This trend is unsustainable. Having such a large ISK faucet is bad for the economy, and this ISK faucet is concentrated to a relatively small number of players. We also think that Carriers and Supercarriers are a bit too effective in PvP now. This change will significantly change the PvP balance, but weGÇÖre confident that Carriers and Supercarriers will remain powerful options for PvP. What:- Light Fighters (Space Superiority): No Change
- Light Fighters (Attack): 20% reduction to Basic Attack and Heavy Rocket Salvo damage.
- Support Fighters: No Change
- Heavy Fighters (Heavy Attack): 10% reduction to Basic Attack and Torpedo Salvo damage.
- Heavy Fighters (Long Range Attack): 30% reduction to Basic Attack damage.
- Heavy Fighters (Shadow): No Change
- NPCs are 15% more likely to shoot at fighters than they are currently.
We will continue to observe the economy after these changes and will make adjustments as necessary to keep it healthy for all our players. If you truly wanted to do something with isk generation, you would fix incursions. Which means this is just an excuse from you.
Incursion payouts are a fraction of pirate bounties.
http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/MER/May_2017/9aaa_top.sinks.faucets.over.time.png http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/MER/May_2017/9b_isk.float.3.png
But please keep up the histrionics.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6578
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 00:09:33 -
[2] - Quote
Gianni Zuiverloon wrote:FIX THE ANOMALIES NOT THE CAPITAL SHIPS. NEW ANOMALIES FOR CARRIERS ONLY AND RESTRICTED ACCESS TO THE CURRENT ANOMS FOR CARRIERS.
AFTER YEARS OF TIME WASTED SKILLING A SHIP YOU NERF IT LIKE THAT?!? ARE YOU SERIOUS?? GIVE ME BACK ALL THE SKILL POINTS YOU THIEFS.
-4 ACCOUNTS SUB RIGHT NOW. UNTIL YOU CHANGE YOUR MIND COMPLETELY.
Bye bye
If you nerf the anomalies you nerf ISK generation for everyone...even those not causing the problem.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6579
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 00:18:33 -
[3] - Quote
Khara Hirl wrote:
Average regular carrier user make 50m tickets. Super carrier maybe double that if they are lucky and can move around fast enough. 22b isk ships don't deserve 400m an hour? I think they should be earning more. Lets say you play 3 hours a day because you work IRL and are not a brain dead snow flake liberal, it would take you a month in ratting in a super just to replace it if you die including insurance. So yeah I'd say it's just fine. More isk in the game means cheaper plex prices which is actually good for alpha retention rate.
I'm going to say no. You should probably not be able to rat up another ship like that in 55 hours of ratting.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6579
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 00:20:55 -
[4] - Quote
Yodasmaster4 wrote:I disagree with the "bit too effective in PVP" just reduce the bounties.
Then you are nerfing bounties for those not causing the problem. Good job. Lets go nerf the income for the vast majority of players. Why? Did they do something wrong? Nope. A very small subset of players were injecting too much ISK into the game so we are screwing over everyone else EXCEPT those players causing the problem.
Balance is just a word in the dictionary between Bad and Boob to you isn't it?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6580
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 04:56:09 -
[5] - Quote
Luc Chastot wrote:Incursions, bounties and all other faucets are the things you should be looking at to fix the money supply; reduce them and find other ways to reward players. EVE also needs more sinks and greater incentives to fight and lose stuff.
It boggles me how uncreative this solution is.
You shouldn't post on the forums, it removes all doubts about the low levels of your intelligence. NPC bounties are by far and away the single largest ISK faucet in the game.
Last month bounty prizes lead to over 69 trillion ISK entering the economy. By comparison incursions lead to just under 10 trillion ISK. In other words, incursions produce 1/7th the amount of ISK that bounty prizes produce. In fact, bounty prizes are 1.6x larger than all other ISK faucets combined. You really come across as an entitled jackass with this post. "Don't nerf my ISK making, literally nerf everyone else's."
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6580
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 05:17:37 -
[6] - Quote
Here is a solution: Double the price of all skill books. Double the size of that ISK sink. Double borker's fees and double the size of that ISK sink. Double the price of blueprints. That should add over 27.5 Trillion in ISK sinks thus largely off setting the additional ISK entering the economy via ratting carriers ans supers. Of course, people won't buy as much stuff...so maybe only 22-25 trillion in additional ISK sinks.
Sure, the people buying skill books aren't the cause of the problem, but screw 'em right? After all carrier ratting, it's serious business. And people paying broker's fees...well they kinda suck anyways right? And people buying blueprints, well they can just go to Hell. After all people ratting in carriers and supers...they are special (apparently special needs).
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6580
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 07:39:44 -
[7] - Quote
Khara Hirl wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Luc Chastot wrote:Incursions, bounties and all other faucets are the things you should be looking at to fix the money supply; reduce them and find other ways to reward players. EVE also needs more sinks and greater incentives to fight and lose stuff.
It boggles me how uncreative this solution is. You shouldn't post on the forums, it removes all doubts about the low levels of your intelligence. NPC bounties are by far and away the single largest ISK faucet in the game. Last month bounty prizes lead to over 69 trillion ISK entering the economy. By comparison incursions lead to just under 10 trillion ISK. In other words, incursions produce 1/7th the amount of ISK that bounty prizes produce. In fact, bounty prizes are 1.6x larger than all other ISK faucets combined. You really come across as an entitled jackass with this post. "Don't nerf my ISK making, literally nerf everyone else's." So you lower the amount of bounties on the npc's... this really isn't that damn hard. They have 5 economists working for them. CCP has some other ploy they are going to bring in later with some real life currency trade to make carrier ratting better, just watch. There is something else behind this. How do I know? Because if there was 150k people online versus 35k this issue would of came and gone, they are lying about something.
Right and then you nerf the income of those not in carriers or supers. Again, that is not balance that is unbalanced. It is shifting the game in favor of players with carriers and supers.
And have you even bothered to look at the graph of the money supply? In terms of it's angle it is somewhere between 90 degrees and the 45 degree line...probably around 67 degrees...which is about how many trillion ISK were added to the economy. It was perhaps the single largest gain in ISK in game in the last 4 years.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6580
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 08:02:11 -
[8] - Quote
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:JC Mieyli wrote:well after seeing the monthly report and reading ccp quant reddit post it doesnt seem so much like a conspiracy anymore but probably still a pretty bad move for ccp i cant say i mind though at least people wont drop carriers on me But if it's true that it's the 1% of the 1% according to CCP Quant, then how can this be a threat to the economy, which is CCP Larrikin's contention in the OP of this thread? Even taking the PCU from each day around 40,000. 1% of 1% is 4 people online at any moment in time. Something in the information CCP is feeding us is not right. Quant's post is the most likely one that is a generalization (even though he claimed it as a literal statement), in which case, CCP are pissing off way more than 1% of 1%. Screw CCP for f'ing up PVP. Find a different solution if there is a problem. Literally, if 4 people online threaten the EVE economy, then fighter DPS isn't the problem. There's far deeper problems then that.
Well, it isn't the number of players but how much ISK they are bringing into the economy.
Now, lets consider that CCP Quant is right, that it is a very small number of players responsible for this large increase in the money supply. You are correct that the solution CCP is embracing is not good in that it is overly broad. As I noted with simply nerfing bounties, CCP is doing something that may be less broad, but may be overly broad. Some players may not be using their carriers/supers for ratting, but do like/want to use them in PvP and this change adversely effects them.
A better solution would be one that is more targeted. One that gets at those who are pumping up the money supply.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6580
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 08:11:53 -
[9] - Quote
Mazzalan Otoro wrote:I've played eve for over 10 years and I just have to say CCP, WOW... .. .. ..... .. .um,huh
Of course there's more isk coming in!!!
You introduced skill extractor/injectors (people hit the ratting/mining fields, active accounts came back and people spent a little more RL money buying plex for injectors to train those long skills, CCP went \o/ << THE MISTAKE
oh wait, What! {no more actually having to actually "train you skills" I just need enough isk} = more capital pilots ( Stupid easy to get into the largest ships in the game what used to take months now can be done in 5min with enough isk,)
= "Everyone" now from the 1 day old toon to the vet's can fly what ever they want when ever they want!
Don't put a band aid on something that isn't the issue...
What is wow is your bad post.
Skill injectors play, at best, a secondary role in ISK creation. The buying and selling of skill injectors does not create ISK. And the SP in the skill injectors has to come out of a character, as such there is an upper limit to how much SP are on the market at any one time. Or to put it differently to buy more SP you'd have to pay increasing amounts to ISK to induce players to part with their character's SP.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6580
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 08:14:19 -
[10] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:how are you guys still this mad
Carrier ratting is apparently serious business.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6582
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 15:46:01 -
[11] - Quote
Mad Bosnian wrote:Atm I can earn 70 million with my Thanatos After patch I could earn around 55-60 million per tick. So, can this "help economy"? You took 30 million ISK less per hour and that's nothing, you need to nerf it even more. You moved 2 carriers from "almost useless" to "don't touch that" So, you guys didn't do anything, I will still buy PLEX and I won't give you a single dime
Yes so much better to indirectly promote paying CCP $19.99/month (or more) for that sub. That'll teach 'em!
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6582
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 16:04:48 -
[12] - Quote
Kryas wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Ralph Shepard wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:Hi Space Friends, Coming with our release on Tuesday, weGÇÖre significantly reducing the damage output of Fighters. Why:We are making this change because Carriers & Supercarriers are too strong in PvE, specifically anomaly ratting in Nullsec. As you may have seen in the May Monthly Economy Report, there is a significant upward trend in the Money Supply. This is primarily due to NPC Bounties. This trend is unsustainable. Having such a large ISK faucet is bad for the economy, and this ISK faucet is concentrated to a relatively small number of players. We also think that Carriers and Supercarriers are a bit too effective in PvP now. This change will significantly change the PvP balance, but weGÇÖre confident that Carriers and Supercarriers will remain powerful options for PvP. What:- Light Fighters (Space Superiority): No Change
- Light Fighters (Attack): 20% reduction to Basic Attack and Heavy Rocket Salvo damage.
- Support Fighters: No Change
- Heavy Fighters (Heavy Attack): 10% reduction to Basic Attack and Torpedo Salvo damage.
- Heavy Fighters (Long Range Attack): 30% reduction to Basic Attack damage.
- Heavy Fighters (Shadow): No Change
- NPCs are 15% more likely to shoot at fighters than they are currently.
We will continue to observe the economy after these changes and will make adjustments as necessary to keep it healthy for all our players. If you truly wanted to do something with isk generation, you would fix incursions. Which means this is just an excuse from you. Incursion payouts are a fraction of pirate bounties. http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/MER/May_2017/9aaa_top.sinks.faucets.over.time.png http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/MER/May_2017/9b_isk.float.3.png But please keep up the histrionics. Correct me if I'm wrong but incursion rats have bounties on them as well? That graph just shows the payout from incursions. Incursion bounties would be included in the bounty total because.... well, they're bounties?
No, I don't think so.
https://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Incursion_sites https://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Incursions
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6582
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 16:13:10 -
[13] - Quote
Alright, since 99.99% of the people posting in this thread cannot look at the f-u-king data. Here is the latest
MER: in terms of the money supply http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/MER/May_2017/9b_isk.float.3.png
Here is the graph of the time series: http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/MER/May_2017/9b_isk.float.3.png
Note how much ISK was added to the economy in May? Over 64 trillion ISK.
Now, lets just go look back in time at September 2016.
Same set of graphs:
http://content.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/70577/1/9a_sinksfaucets.png http://content.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/70577/1/9b_isk.float.3.png
How much ISK was added: 11.4 trillion ISK.
Now since most of you seem to be innumerates we are talking about a 6 fold increase in the amount of ISK entering the game.
600% more ISK entering the game.
Maybe this is ham handed, but it is too much ISK entering the game. This kind of trajectory, if sustained would be very, very bad.
Perhaps CCP should simple bar carriers and supers from ratting. You cannot warp into the anomaly. That way there is no need to mess with DPS, and we address the ISK problem.
I doubt this will work for many of the entitled self-righteous twats in this thread though.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6584
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 16:23:20 -
[14] - Quote
Krieg Austern wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Perhaps CCP should simple bar carriers and supers from ratting. You cannot warp into the anomaly. That way there is no need to mess with DPS, and we address the ISK problem.
I doubt this will work for many of the entitled self-righteous twats in this thread though. If you read the comments, a lot of people don't have a problem with limiting the carrier areas. By taking this sledgehammer approach to try and stem the isk, they have ruined the ship for pve and pvp. As I mentioned in my post above - fix the environment NOT the tools.
Actually, I agree. Nerfing the DPS is too heavy handed. Something has to be done, but this is probably not it. Every player who has a carrier and uses it just for PVP is screwed over by this. Same with players with supers. They too get screwed if they are just using it for PvP.
BTW, the March 2016 MER and the same graphs,
http://content.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/70162/1/9a_sinksfaucets.png http://content.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/70162/1/9b_isk.float.3.png
A total of about 23 trillion ISK was added to the economy.
Everyone is so focused on what is "good for them" they are ignoring the wider perspective which is what the devs are paid to do.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6584
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 16:27:05 -
[15] - Quote
Laenatus wrote:And the good people of delve didn't have anything to do with this right? I dont blame you, i'm sure we'd do the same if we could.
Look at my alliance....I don't give a flying **** about pointing the finger. My point is that this is not sustainable. It has to change. Yes, this current approach is ham-handed at best. But being a complete moron about it, like most posters are, means that CCP will feel justified in ignoring the idiocy coming from this thread.
Now...pull your head out before you suffocate.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6588
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 17:23:26 -
[16] - Quote
Devon Stone wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:
Actually, I agree. Nerfing the DPS is too heavy handed. Something has to be done, but this is probably not it. Every player who has a carrier and uses it just for PVP is screwed over by this. Same with players with supers. They too get screwed if they are just using it for PvP.
Goon and surrogates crying again, where did the drone touch you? PVP as in you sitting in your POS bubble cowering goon? Or when your meat shields failed or fled you cowering all over the map station camping? The only thing goon and alts are concerned about is ISK and the RMT they make from it. So go ahead goon, tell us where the drone touched you cause you were all for drone nerfs.
Your post is very muddled...on the one hand you are implying that because I am in GSF I am interested in only making ISK. On the other you are implying I hate drones and ratting even though I agree this nerf is probably not the right way to go regarding the flood of ISK flowing into the game and potential bad effects that could have.
Maybe you should sit down with an adult and have them help you figure things out.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6588
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 17:32:13 -
[17] - Quote
Mary Timeshift Jane wrote:Quote:
600% more ISK entering the game.
So what's the problem, everyone gets rich, buys all toys they ever dreamed of and we all can have great time of CAPITAL fun. Instead you suggest to keep people poor, limit themselves to what frigs? Dessies? Cruisers.. rarely people take BC, and BS not happening on large scale roam unless Alliance OP. Instead we could all have titans and bash each other left and right. I suggest you get out of your small mind, small man, small world mentality. We could be living like gods, like we deserve to!
You do not get rich this way. Please learn some basic economics. Increasing the money supply has long been associated with rising prices so that the increase income and the increase in prices cancel each other out.
Don't believe me, this is precisely why we had stagflation around the early 1970s. There used to be a macro statistical relationship between the inflation rate and unemployment. Higher inflation => lower unemployment. Policy makers used this to try and counter act the business cycle. Problem is people figured out that higher wages and higher prices did not lead to an economic gain. This can be seen by looking at the household/individual's budget constraint:
P(y)*Y + P(x)*x = w*H
if P(y) and P(x) and w (the price for good y, x and the wage respectively) all double you get:
2*P(y)*Y + 2*P(x)*x = 2*w*H.
This can be re-written as:
2*[P(y)*Y + P(x)*x] = 2*w*H.
Basic algebra tells us that the 2's cancel, that is we are, in the end, left with
P(y)*Y + P(x)*x = w*H.
That is the original budget constraint. Now once people figure this out--i.e. they no longer suffer from money illusion that inflation-unemployment trade off I talked about disappeared and we ended up with higher inflation and higher unemployment which in turn lead to the political concept known as the misery index.
So pull your head out of ass.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6588
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 17:38:53 -
[18] - Quote
Mary Timeshift Jane wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:Mary Timeshift Jane wrote:Quote:
600% more ISK entering the game.
So what's the problem, everyone gets rich, buys all toys they ever dreamed of and we all can have great time of CAPITAL fun. Instead you suggest to keep people poor, limit themselves to what frigs? Dessies? Cruisers.. rarely people take BC, and BS not happening on large scale roam unless Alliance OP. Instead we could all have titans and bash each other left and right. I suggest you get out of your small mind, small man, small world mentality. We could be living like gods, like we deserve to! Want to point this out as an example of the extreme short sightedness. The problem isn't some virtual spaceship attributes, its that people don't understand the basics of how money works. If everyone has money, then money is worthless. Carrier and Super Carrier ratting (along with the afkability of null sec anoms) is turning ISK in EVE Online into Zimbabwe Money.. We ALL end up on a super stupid isk treadmill where we all have to grind more to get what we need in game because of this. CCP's action will (at least partially) reverse this. Yes your super or carrier will be less good at burning down havens and sanctums, but it doesn't matter because eventually the isk in your wallet will have some actual value. CCP just needs to do something about afkability in null sec anoms (then tackle wealth generation in high sec with is too safe) and we'll all be sitting pretty economically. Isk is just a mediator, and totally irrelevant in its core. What's relevant are materials needed to build things, and gathering those materials require time and effort. Minerals don't mine themselves, you know. If people don't mine y ou will have no ships to buy with all your isk whatever value it is. Promoting value of mediators is also misleading people and tricking them into believing isk is in any way relevant.
Yes, ISK is a facilitator of transactions, but if you print too much of it it destroys the purchasing power of said currency. When the government does it, it is called an inflation tax or seigniorage. When the government does it it destroys the pruchasing power of the money already in existence. When players do it with ISK it does the same thing but to other players. In short you are getting "rich" by making other players poorer. That is not game balance. You want the money supply to grow at about the same rate as the real economy--i.e. little to no inflation.
You really do not understand even the rudiments of monetary theory at all. For example, ISK is not a fiat currency, IMO, it is actually a synthetic commodity currency.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6594
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 18:51:25 -
[19] - Quote
Valdr Auduin wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Mary Timeshift Jane wrote:Quote:
600% more ISK entering the game.
So what's the problem, everyone gets rich, buys all toys they ever dreamed of and we all can have great time of CAPITAL fun. Instead you suggest to keep people poor, limit themselves to what frigs? Dessies? Cruisers.. rarely people take BC, and BS not happening on large scale roam unless Alliance OP. Instead we could all have titans and bash each other left and right. I suggest you get out of your small mind, small man, small world mentality. We could be living like gods, like we deserve to! You do not get rich this way. Please learn some basic economics. Increasing the money supply has long been associated with rising prices so that the increase income and the increase in prices cancel each other out. Don't believe me, this is precisely why we had stagflation around the early 1970s. There used to be a macro statistical relationship between the inflation rate and unemployment. Higher inflation => lower unemployment. Policy makers used this to try and counter act the business cycle. Problem is people figured out that higher wages and higher prices did not lead to an economic gain. This can be seen by looking at the household/individual's budget constraint: P(y)*Y + P(x)*x = w*H if P(y) and P(x) and w (the price for good y, x and the wage respectively) all double you get: 2*P(y)*Y + 2*P(x)*x = 2*w*H. This can be re-written as: 2*[P(y)*Y + P(x)*x] = 2*w*H. Basic algebra tells us that the 2's cancel, that is we are, in the end, left with P(y)*Y + P(x)*x = w*H. That is the original budget constraint. Now once people figure this out--i.e. they no longer suffer from money illusion that inflation-unemployment trade off I talked about disappeared and we ended up with higher inflation and higher unemployment which in turn lead to the political concept known as the misery index. So pull your head out of ass. Edit: To be clear why that post is so freaking stupid. Why don't we do this in real life? Because most people and most leaders of countries do not want to end up like fecking Venezuela or Zimbabwe with run away hyperinflation. I can live with that reasoning, but how do you answer to carriers not being viable for fighting things?
That is the trick. Keep them from injecting too much ISK into the game and make them PVP viable. One draconian solution is just keep them out of the anomalies. Somebody else suggested a hull penalty when ratting (note the penalty could be to payouts not the ships functionality). I find both of these rather uninspiring, but probably better than what we have now.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6594
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 18:54:30 -
[20] - Quote
Isuro Tanaka wrote:Sure seems like a lot of "1 % of 1%" people here...hmmm.
Because Quant probably got that wrong. Not literally wrong, in terms of ratters it might be 1% of the 1%, but not everyone who owns a carrier rats in a carrier or even rats to make ISK. I used to own a carrier, rarely ratted in it (and this was back with the old fighters under Dominion sov when I was in IT Alliance...so way back, and the amount of ISK I made was probably less than 200 million ISK). So a nerf like this would screw me over if I still had a carrier even though I am not part of the problem. And to give credit to whom it belongs, this objection was first raised by Surrendermonkey dozens of pages back.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6596
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 19:01:15 -
[21] - Quote
Cismet wrote: Your final line was describing yourself? There have been many other suggestions for how to fix it that don't involve destroying Carriers for both PVP and PVE.
No, it was aimed at the idiots suggesting things like: nerf all bounties. That is compounding a bad decision with and even worse one. Or the one's trying to claim that having a 6 fold increase in ISK entering the game is not going to cause problems. Those jerks are literally destroying the purchasing power of everyone else's ISK for their benefit. There is very serious stupid in this thread...stupid from people who don't understand even rudimentary economics.
Cismet wrote:Two excellent ones are capping tick sizes and diminishing returns on bounty payouts. The latter has the benefit of removing the problem of afk-droneboaters from the ISK stream. The problem isn't the concept that the money stream needs to go (Though the actual net money going into the system is +15T ISK, not 60, but by all means continue to spout the histrionics you were so adamantly against earlier), the problem is the method and demographic targeted. Why don't you try not being a monumental tool and be constructive, rather than just insult people who are justifiably angry by a MASSIVE nerf for which they aren't even necessarily the problem.
Some issues with this:
First off if this applies to everyone it is taking a bad idea and compounding it and applying it to those who are not the problem. Second, the cap/diminishing return is not a one and done number. It will have to continuously monitored and changed regularly as players change in game behaviors. Look at my signature, the idea of getting it "just right" even with constant monitoring is going to be problematic. You'll know how much ISK has entered the system, but you won't necessarily know how much is going too, so your policy will always be looking backwards, not forwards. In other words, it assumes a degree of information that nobody possesses not even the Devs.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6596
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 19:03:31 -
[22] - Quote
Devon Stone wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:
That is the trick. Keep them from injecting too much ISK into the game and make them PVP viable. One draconian solution is just keep them out of the anomalies. Somebody else suggested a hull penalty when ratting (note the penalty could be to payouts not the ships functionality). I find both of these rather uninspiring, but probably better than what we have now.
Apparently goon don't need to be concerned about PVP viability cause while camping in a station you'll see little difference
You don't read very well do you?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6596
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 19:05:34 -
[23] - Quote
Mestori Anar wrote:If the problem was bounties, wtf are nerfing the ship?!?!?!?! Keep the ship as is, and then do a logarthmic drop for bounties. The higher tick you get, the lower your next tick will be for x amount of time. That way casuals who rat for an hour or so can still get their income while the guys who are truly the 1% of the 1% will see their ticks drop dramatically if they are constantly super ratting.
I am nowhere near the 1% of the 1% and these changes absolutely suck.
Because bounties were not a problem before the carrier changes. Yes bounties injected alot of ISK, but not to the degree we are seeing now. Prior to the change it was around 40 trillion ISK being injected, not it is nearly 70 trillion ISK.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6596
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 19:08:03 -
[24] - Quote
Backz Banny wrote:Devon Stone wrote:Backz Banny wrote:so, one thing nobody seems to have touched yet:
why is there more money? maybe because people became "more productive". just like in the real ******* world, where the available monetary supply has to be increased just because society became more efficient and productive, because there is more stuff being built, faster and more cost effective.
You're right goon, they do need to nerf bounties by 50% and faction drops by 75% along with fighter nerfs. yeah, and put npc sell orders at fixed prices for every item. and buff mission income. did you even read what i wrote, that it all was about more isk SINKS to adjust the amount of money in the game? i **** you no kiddo, it's like talking to a potted plant about the inner workings of a nuclear power plant -.-
That is another alternative, pump up the sinks. Problem with this though is that it does not necessarily penalizes those who ARE injecting ISK into the system. That new guy looking to buy the battleship skill book is unlikely to be injecting hundreds of billions of ISK into the economy...so why should the cost of the skillbook double so that some guy who has billions of ISK already can go on getting even more?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6596
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 19:11:49 -
[25] - Quote
Devon Stone wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Devon Stone wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:
Actually, I agree. Nerfing the DPS is too heavy handed. Something has to be done, but this is probably not it. Every player who has a carrier and uses it just for PVP is screwed over by this. Same with players with supers. They too get screwed if they are just using it for PvP.
Goon and surrogates crying again, where did the drone touch you? PVP as in you sitting in your POS bubble cowering goon? Or when your meat shields failed or fled you cowering all over the map station camping? The only thing goon and alts are concerned about is ISK and the RMT they make from it. So go ahead goon, tell us where the drone touched you cause you were all for drone nerfs. Your post is very muddled...on the one hand you are implying that because I am in GSF I am interested in only making ISK. On the other you are implying I hate drones and ratting even though I agree this nerf is probably not the right way to go regarding the flood of ISK flowing into the game and potential bad effects that could have. Maybe you should sit down with an adult and have them help you figure things out. Oh no goon - definition 'stupid person', you cried for drone nerfs cause someone blew up your internet space ship. Now the follow up to the overpowered fighter situation. Just as drones were nerfed, now fighters will come in line with the drone nerfs you cried your eyes out about. Sorry carebear isk farmer, you'll just have to farm harder.
I have not cried for drone nerfs. Maybe some Goons have, but then your bigotry is showing.
As for the fighter nerf, I agree that there is a problem with regards to the money supply so your ISK farming comment is simple stupid and wrong. I do not agree that the nerf to the PVP side of carriers/supers is warranted.
You are just flat out wrong and/or stupid and a bigot too.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6597
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 19:51:20 -
[26] - Quote
WhiteOrm wrote:Teckos Pech wrote: You do not get rich this way. Please learn some basic economics. Increasing the money supply has long been associated with rising prices so that the increase income and the increase in prices cancel each other out.
CCP Larrikin wrote: This trend is unsustainable. Having such a large ISK faucet is bad for the economy, and this ISK faucet is concentrated to a relatively small number of players.
Nope. You DO get rich this way. Because when small number of players have many ISK it directly makes them rich. It is other players that become relatively poorer from ISK inflation etc. To put it simply you had a chance to become rich by becoming a carrier/super pilot (that is a long shot), but you have that chance no more.
Not as a whole you don't. Look at any RL economy where they have resorted to printing money. Wiemar Germany, Zimbabwe, Venezuela today. The latter is particularly instructive as it is turning in to a veritable **** hole.
And those few players who do "get rich" they do so by destroying the purchasing power of the rest of the player base and when that ISK starts circulating you end up with inflation, potentially lots of inflation. This can, in turn lead to a feedback loop where more and more people feel like they have to rat in carriers and supers to stay ahead of the inflation which simply makes the situation worse.
Having a game like this is not balanced and can be very bad for the long term prospects. Reducing this degree of growth in the money supply MUST happen.
How that reduction in the growth of the money supply happens should be open to debate. The current approach does appear very much to be, at best, ham handed. At worst is will be bad for the game and I would urge CCP to look for an alternative solution even if it is as uninspiring and banal as putting a temporary ban on carriers and supers ratting in NS anomalies. This would preserve the PvP aspects of these ships and address the money supply issue and buy time for finding a better and more thoughtful solution.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6597
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 20:21:55 -
[27] - Quote
Ter Jern Wolf wrote:Mariza vonAmdonen wrote:Gumby Taron wrote:[quote=Crash 888]how is pvp screwed by this?
This really hurts small scale pvp groups and their ability to fight numeric odds using higher SP and isk investment into ships such as carriers and super carriers, and it strengthens large capital heavy alliances such as PL, NC. and GSF who have the numbers to not be affected by the damage cuts.
yet its "PL, NC. and GSF " that are most vocal against it Because they are the largest null sec groups and see the short term effects of poorly planned changes? Isk faucet a problem? Add sinks, remove taps. Don't nerf perfectly good if not underpowered capital ships. (they don't have the teeth should in a pvp fight yet...)
I disagree on the sinks, those will be hard to balance and will bring additional problems (people seeing a jump in say skill book prices for a problem they did not cause will not sit well).
Here is what I wrote earlier as a temporary response....
The current approach does appear very much to be, at best, ham handed. At worst is will be bad for the game and I would urge CCP to look for an alternative solution even if it is as uninspiring and banal as putting a temporary ban on carriers and supers ratting in NS anomalies. This would preserve the PvP aspects of these ships and address the money supply issue and buy time for finding a better and more thoughtful solution.
And again: credit where credit is due...the notion that this is heavy handed and not good originates with SurrenderMonkey.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6599
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 20:26:17 -
[28] - Quote
Jhousetlin Zamayid wrote:HiSec Incursions aren't really a problem. If you look at the amount of ISK printed in different regions, NullSec outshines hisec by many orders of magnitude. Just look at the graphs.
Also when an Incursion runner cashes out the LP, he/she deletes ISK from the game. So Incursions also provide a sink. Unlike null ratting.
Correct. Last month incursion payouts were 5.8 trillion ISK. LP ISK sinks were a whopping 3.2 trillion or about 55% of the incursion payouts.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6599
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 20:28:03 -
[29] - Quote
Devon Stone wrote:Cut number of anoms spawned
Cut the respawn rate
Run an anom, search 3 - 4 jumps to maybe find another
repeat
And why should people not ratting in carriers and supers have their game nerfed?
Oh, and deflation is BadGäó too.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6599
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 20:32:57 -
[30] - Quote
Ter Jern Wolf wrote: We desperately need more sinks in the game - the easiest way to balance additional sinks is make more items vanity and bpc available from LP + ISK and make bounties payout isk + lp normally (in smaller isk quantities.)
The next sink is to restore / increase admin costs for alliances in the way of Concord Fees, or of NPC only resources that are needed to feed citadels. Both of these target the sink problem and target the accumulation of wealth while maintaining easy balance handles to adjust as player behavior changes.
The third sink could be finally moving implants over to player construction - and again have the bpc / parts for them be NPC isk + lp rewards.
We have GOOD options. Lets take them.
Up until recently the amount of ISK being added to the economy was not that large. In fact, in looking at the price indices there is very little overall inflation in the game...for now.
And if the sinks are over done then there is a risk of deflation which is also bad, especially if it is too large. We don't want to see-saw back and forth between too much ISK entering the system then too little and so forth.
Maybe we need more sinks, but in the last few months I would have said no. And I'm not inclined to include more ISK because more ISK is entering the system. The people paying into those sinks won't necessarily be the one's bringing in the ISK. So we'd have some players getting a buff and others a nerf and while the system as a whole might be balanced, from an individual perspective it probably won't look that way. And at the end of the day, it is the individual perspective that matters...as it is individuals who decide to stay or leave the game.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6602
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 20:39:21 -
[31] - Quote
Ezio Sotken wrote:Ju'Kan wrote:I just realized.. Not that it was perfect back in the day, but CCP used to have an actual Economist in their employ.. He left back in '14. The economy has gone to heck in a hand basket since then.
Coincidence? If I remember right, it was not just one economist, but a whole team of them.
There was one economist that we know of. And yeah, he left when he was offered to head up a university there in Iceland. I would not be surprised if a number of CCP Devs have some backgrounds in economics.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6602
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 21:48:54 -
[32] - Quote
Another suggestion I saw elsewhere...
Add a resist bonus to rats when taking damage from fighters.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6602
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 21:50:50 -
[33] - Quote
Chevy Caputtos wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Mestori Anar wrote:If the problem was bounties, wtf are nerfing the ship?!?!?!?! Keep the ship as is, and then do a logarthmic drop for bounties. The higher tick you get, the lower your next tick will be for x amount of time. That way casuals who rat for an hour or so can still get their income while the guys who are truly the 1% of the 1% will see their ticks drop dramatically if they are constantly super ratting.
I am nowhere near the 1% of the 1% and these changes absolutely suck. Because bounties were not a problem before the carrier changes. Yes bounties injected alot of ISK, but not to the degree we are seeing now. Prior to the change it was around 40 trillion ISK being injected, not it is nearly 70 trillion ISK. Maybe it has something to do with adding skill injectors... Then players use end-game ships to rat, because there isn't other profitable/meaningful content available.
I doubt it. Skill injectors have been around for quite sometime. It is most likely due to changes to carriers and supers.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6602
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 21:58:29 -
[34] - Quote
Vendoor Zenjarr wrote:Just here to say it's not the 1% of the 1% of the players who are affected.
Nerfing is never a good answer to a problem, you could for example change the bounty payouts.
I would suggest you (CCP) stop EVERYTHING and start reading the forums/ reddit. Read what your playerbase want's and start fixing those issue's. Stop doing new stuff (like pushing out skinns every single ******* week).
You aren't the only one out there ratting you know. Perhaps if you pulled your nose away from your particular tree and looked around a bit more....
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6603
|
Posted - 2017.06.11 08:30:09 -
[35] - Quote
Nina Nobuna wrote:How about reducing bounties instead... did someone suggest that already?
Yeah because reducing the ISK income of players who are not the problem is always a good idea.
How about you FOADIAF.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6603
|
Posted - 2017.06.11 08:31:16 -
[36] - Quote
idontknowy wrote:Bruce Destro wrote:VeronicaKell wrote:Buff NPCs then. I have been training fighters for the last 4 months. Why the hell are you ruining a PVP ship to make your bottom line better? Do your jobs as creative game innovators and not EA Game flunkies... oh wait. carriers will still have the largest ratting income. 20% reduction in dps can be considered roughly 20% reduction in bounties. 150m an hour to 125? that is still far greater than you can get in a fully skilled faction battleship. Or I could run 2 vni's, make about the same and only less than 300 mil ISK on grid....
Then why were you risking a much more expensive ship? Oh wait you were stupid.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6612
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 04:47:56 -
[37] - Quote
Chevy Caputtos wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote:C0ATL wrote:
Where exactly do the graphs show >carriers< responsible for the ISK influx? While bounty is the highest index on the income graph, it needs to be stated that it has always been so. The extra influx is coming from Alpha clones being drafted into nullsec alliances and thought to AFK rat in drone cruisers. CCP claims to make a stand against passive isk income while doing little to nothing in terms of punishing bot users and solving AFK cruiser ratting. Funny how on the same release as carrier nerfs, the Vexor and Ishtar models are getting a re-work :))) ...
The fact that the dramatic spike in Bounties from about 40 Trillion isk to today's 70 Trillion isk can be traced back to the patch that buffed carriers. Given that Vexors & Ishtars have been around in their current form for significantly longer, and if it were profitable to the tune of 30 trillion isk to put more alts doing it, people would have done it with subbed alts, it's a reasonable assumption to guess that Alpha's in Vexors are not responsible for the sudden jump and that it is instead carriers. Furthermore Quant is almost certainly capable of pulling more detailed metrics from the system like 'what ship was someone in when they got paid/killed a rat' and probably does know what he's talking about when he says that the spike is carriers. Especially when the player accessible data supports that statement. I.E. Stop trying to blame someone else and accept that it is carriers causing the massive spike. Might have more to do with skill injectors.
Yes, I used a skill injector and suddenly 150 million ISK showed up in my wallet. You can't be serious with this. Even if people are using injectors to get into carriers the problem is...carriers. They are too efficient at ratting and making ISK.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6612
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 04:50:19 -
[38] - Quote
idontknowy wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote:C0ATL wrote:
Where exactly do the graphs show >carriers< responsible for the ISK influx? While bounty is the highest index on the income graph, it needs to be stated that it has always been so. The extra influx is coming from Alpha clones being drafted into nullsec alliances and thought to AFK rat in drone cruisers. CCP claims to make a stand against passive isk income while doing little to nothing in terms of punishing bot users and solving AFK cruiser ratting. Funny how on the same release as carrier nerfs, the Vexor and Ishtar models are getting a re-work :))) ...
The fact that the dramatic spike in Bounties from about 40 Trillion isk to today's 70 Trillion isk can be traced back to the patch that buffed carriers. Given that Vexors & Ishtars have been around in their current form for significantly longer, and if it were profitable to the tune of 30 trillion isk to put more alts doing it, people would have done it with subbed alts, it's a reasonable assumption to guess that Alpha's in Vexors are not responsible for the sudden jump and that it is instead carriers. Furthermore Quant is almost certainly capable of pulling more detailed metrics from the system like 'what ship was someone in when they got paid/killed a rat' and probably does know what he's talking about when he says that the spike is carriers. Especially when the player accessible data supports that statement. I.E. Stop trying to blame someone else and accept that it is carriers causing the massive spike. CCP Quant is an amateur statistician using outlier numbers.
Those outliers are are causing a problem. Just because a data point is an outlier does not make it false, or unimportant.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6612
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 04:53:03 -
[39] - Quote
Hamasaki Cross wrote:I quit eve after one of the dozen nerfs in the last few months after playing since Beta. Someone linked this nerf to discord, which caused me to chuckle and chime in. For you people complaining about nerfs, it's really quite simple. "Isk faucets" need to go away so you buy more plex since this game hasn't had a new player base in many years. (free to play influx is laughable, as any game on such a transition is well known to be on it's last legs) As such, it's not going to be unusual in the coming months to continue to see many more nerfs for players who have invested billions of isk and years of time into SP and ships, in order to reduce the total number of available isk/SP. Since injectors implementation, these nerfs cause a direct loss of SP as people rip now obsolete skills (now Carriers, before, rorquals, before mining barges/hulks when rorquals were rebalanced, leadership skills, etc) at a great loss. As new injectors give far less SP than the SP ripped, this is net profit for CCP who needs an increased revenue stream. I rip 500k SP and get 150k back in return or whatever the calculation works out to be. 350k SP removed from the game so I need to buy 3 additional injectors to make back my lost SP. I'm going to run on the assumption that this moronic CCP trend will continue and continue to train useless skills as they suddenly become the only viable option for gameplay (such as salvaging) in the future. And since I FOOLISHLY (really, shame on me) subbed for the remainder of the year, near the end of said sub, I'll login and take a peak around at the new 'enhanced' CCP velator with mining lasers only gameplay style. "for the economy" of course since suddenly CCP really cares about the "player driven economy" which is actually now "ccp nerf driven". All this said, I find CCP's strategy highly curious for a game that attracts zero new customers. (new accounts are redundant as people increase scale on existing accounts in the world's most multibox able game). Screw remaining cash cow customers who have given years of solid support in preference for.... I dunno what... bankruptcy? To CCP devs/marketing team, at this point, have you guys just given up on this game? -- This is an honest question (not trolling, bruh) and I wonder what the honest answer is (or if such a thing were realistic to expect) And finally, somewhat comically, I find it hilarious that fozzy didn't send out this nerf advice. I guess he/she/other finally got tired of being crapped on by the general population for announcing many dozens of other bad business moves.
That degree of growth in the money supply is simply bad. When the growth rate increases by 600% the next thing will be dramatic inflation if sustained.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6612
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 05:19:11 -
[40] - Quote
Jhousetlin Zamayid wrote:FYI, EVE is now in hyperinflation. This is extremely troubling and does have game-breaking consequences if there isn't some form of intervention to bring it back under control.
Uhhh...no, not yet. Let this kind of growth in the money supply continue and could very well happen.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6614
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 06:07:37 -
[41] - Quote
So I just looked and characters added a whopping 53 trillion ISK to their wallets in May 2017. To put this in perspective, for the entire year for the years 2014, 2015 and 2016, players added 61.3 trillion, 103.7 trillion, and 81.9 trillion ISK to their wallets respectively. In other words, May, by itself, add more ISK than half of the year 2015.
Let me repeat that, in one month, May 2017, as much ISK was added to player's wallets as was added for 6 months of 2015.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6614
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 06:19:40 -
[42] - Quote
And on average, using the data from Feb. 2012 through Nov. 2016 about 7 trillion ISK is added each month to character's wallets. This is 757% increase in the average growth rate of the supply of ISK.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6614
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 06:21:45 -
[43] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:lolzz Quekz wrote:Now imagine all those carriers training say 15 alts he can basically take over 1/2 or all the anoms in a system and afk rat.. hot dropper tackles one of his afktars.. 14 other afktars warp to him whats the trade out of that fight? Basically if he cant fight back that drop he can just warp out his non tackled afktars loss is still lower than a tackled carrier. But still makes a ton of profit from that afk session balanced? Yea! Cos ccp wins the wallet war! And whos the one who loses? The players And you know, almost none of them will do it, because it's a lot of work, and if they were going to do it they would have been doing it three years ago already. So yeah, not worried about a sudden spike in Ishtars or anything like that actually happening.
Not only that, but with his one carrier he was likely able to PLEX his account. With 16 accounts he'll have to actually open his wallet to fund those 16 accounts.
Yes, I will base my argument against this change on players having infinite wealth!
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6614
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 06:28:29 -
[44] - Quote
And one more fun statistic....on May 7th, 2017 character's added 6,425,554,631,136.00 IS to their wallets. Or almost as much as an entire month (about 91%).
Yup, no problem there.
[/sarcasm]
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6614
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 06:31:16 -
[45] - Quote
lolzz Quekz wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote:lolzz Quekz wrote:Now imagine all those carriers training say 15 alts he can basically take over 1/2 or all the anoms in a system and afk rat.. hot dropper tackles one of his afktars.. 14 other afktars warp to him whats the trade out of that fight? Basically if he cant fight back that drop he can just warp out his non tackled afktars loss is still lower than a tackled carrier. But still makes a ton of profit from that afk session balanced? Yea! Cos ccp wins the wallet war! And whos the one who loses? The players And you know, almost none of them will do it, because it's a lot of work, and if they were going to do it they would have been doing it three years ago already. So yeah, not worried about a sudden spike in Ishtars or anything like that actually happening. Not only that, but with his one carrier he was likely able to PLEX his account. With 16 accounts he'll have to actually open his wallet to fund those 16 accounts. Yes, I will base my argument against this change on players having infinite wealth! which is the base of my point this whole nerf-ing is only benefitting CCP does it really benefit the economy? i doubt so its the same as how some miners run like 10 accounts is it hard work? it might be cause its a little more complicated than afktars who warp in orbit and drop drones but ccp think its alright since they plex that 10 accounts right? but if you make that same amount in a single account.. no bro.. its not good for us we need more people plex-ing or subbing accounts
Nobody is going to go from a PLEXed carrier to 16 accounts subbed with RL money.
If anything the rage here would indicate that CCP is going to come out on the losing end assuming the threats to quit are indeed real.
And to be clear, these people threatening to quit...if they are doing so because of their loss of ratting income, well they are short sighted fools who do not realize that if this kind of growth in ISK is sustained it will ruin the game for everyone.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6615
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 06:57:06 -
[46] - Quote
lolzz Quekz wrote:teckos i think you misunderstood my point these top 1% wont sub with their RL money in any case they can as easily plex 15 accounts. what i am saying is this: if i sub my account but makes 200m/h eg. from ratting its not ok cos i can basically stop subbing and just run plex or basically 1 plex/mth so basically they potentially lost 1 sub account cause he can fund it entirely out from ratting ticks
compared to if i need to plex 15 accounts to make the same amount ccp makes 15x the money compared to that 1 account that runs 1 plex
these plex of cos comes from some other players who buy plex with RL cash to fund whatever they need or as start-up money so if there is a demand for more plex to sub accounts to multi-box ccp wins and people who have near infinite pocket would too
Still not going to happen all that much if at all. A player in a carrier or a super may be able to PLEX their account and have some left over after ratting for a number of hours. But ratting in an ishtar or VNI is going to take more time.
This type or argument ignores a basic economic concept known as opportunity cost. Devoting more time to ratting is not costless. Devoting more time to ratting with 15 accounts is going to come with even higher costs.
The problem here is that there is way, way, way too much ISK entering the economy. It absolutely has to stop. This maybe a boneheaded way to do it, but the problem is real and it has to be addressed, and no matter how one does address the problem the days of making alot of ISK with a carrier or super are done. And that is a good thing.
Edit: Anyone who mines, uses the minerals to build a JF and then self-destructs it...they are doing it horribly, horribly wrong. They are losing ISK On that venture. Yes, they maybe adding ISK to the in game economy, but the number of people doing this is minuscule or zero.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6615
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 07:38:21 -
[47] - Quote
idontknowy wrote:
An outlier is an extreme example, not a regular occurrence, doesn't happen all the time. and should have never been thrown out as if it were a repeatable thing to net 780mil/hr. That he used such a number makes him look amateurish.
There is only one problem.
If you look at the monthly aggregate yes, May looks like an outlier. But when you look at the daily averages for ISK injected for each month May 2017 has a much higher average. Further, the standard deviation is lower than many other months. In fact, in graphing the daily ISK growth, what becomes quite obvious is that prior to 2017 there were days where the ISK growth was negative and days where it was positive. But in 2017 the number of days with negative ISK growth become both smaller in frequency and in magnitude. In fact, after April 20th the days of negative growth are negligible in both number and magnitude. So it is not just "one outlier" here.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6615
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 07:41:21 -
[48] - Quote
Eric Lemmonte wrote:Looking at some of those graphs they have on https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/monthly-economic-report-may-2017/ makes me wonder if they could fix this issue with tweaking manufacture numbers somehow. Both bounty and produced good prices have gone up in a very similar profile this last year. It looks to me that people are ratting the best way they can to pay for these ever increasing costs to buy produced goods. You still have time to fix this. Don't be hasty and make such a drastic change without first thinking it over. I see that online player counts have dwindled over the years and I can't help but think that CCP is getting anxious that they're starting to lose their cash cow. Right now we're down to the same number of online players as back in 2008. Please don't turn into another EA or Activision. Just make a quality game and you will keep a loyal player base. These wild changes you keep doing is making this a bumpy road for everyone
So...manufacturers should be screwed over because you are putting too much ISK into the economy with your carrier or super.
That is reasonable to you? Really? Lets screw over players who are not causing the problem and let those who are continue on making a mess.
And you do realize that the CPI has been essentially flat for like that last 6 months to a year, right? Oh, and that is likely an overstatement of inflation as CCP use, IIRC, a Laspreyes index which can have issues with being upwardly biased.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6615
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 07:43:03 -
[49] - Quote
lolzz Quekz wrote:
issue now is that nerfing fighter aint really gonna solve the inflation issue and its punishing people who invested time and money getting into them to be told their skills are proly not gonna be much use. or they can some stupid debuff or something in all anoms to reduce fighter's effectiveness against all npc entities so they at least retain their overall effectiveness in pvp
the only fix to the situation is basically like what they did with pirate BPC decrease drop rates across the entire board ores bounty drop rates, all module drop rates and raise scarcity of everything so every ship blow up in space reduces its availability until the inflation can be curbed when everyone has exhausted almost all their nigh infinite isk
First off, there is no signs of major inflation....yet.
Second, yes, it will head off the possibility of high inflation because nobody is going to go the route you suggest. It just will not happen, that is just pure fantasy.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6616
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 07:52:47 -
[50] - Quote
Yuri Sarain wrote:I see the sense of the changes due to ISK creating reasons, but I see a big problem when it comes to pvp. Thanks to low sensor strength the fighters are extremely easy to jam and due to larger signature radius also easy to kill. This makes carrier pretty much useless in pvp, as u can take them out with, for example, a singe griffin.
Conclusion: yes there needs to be less money created in pve with them, but nerfing them even more is a real problem in pvp.
Pretty much my view.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6616
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 08:09:37 -
[51] - Quote
Petros K wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:[quote=Eric Lemmonte] So...manufacturers should be screwed over because you are putting too much ISK into the economy with your carrier or super.
How much ISK do you estimate that a single decend carrier driver can generate every day ?
Apparently quite a bit once you look at the data. Enough to shift the money growth in a decidedly unhealthy way.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6616
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 08:41:02 -
[52] - Quote
Petros K wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Petros K wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:[quote=Eric Lemmonte] So...manufacturers should be screwed over because you are putting too much ISK into the economy with your carrier or super.
How much ISK do you estimate that a single decend carrier driver can generate every day ? Apparently quite a bit once you look at the data. Enough to shift the money growth in a decidedly unhealthy way. Quite a bit isnt an answer , give me a good number . Lets asume a thanatos/nidd(decent fit , not godlike) that the driver can rat for .... 3 hours? maybe up to 5 before he gets TIRED because of actively playing (include in your estimation that the driver will have to dock for an unknown ammount of time in case danger enters in the system ) Now compare that ammount to a VNI that rats 24/7
A VNI ratting 24/7. Please don't go full moron.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6618
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 09:38:11 -
[53] - Quote
Kaze Mester wrote:baltec1 wrote:M3tamorph wrote:Is CCP really ignoring all this posts and will not give a flying "panda" about the players and their opinions?
It's obvious that this will be worst change CCP already forced their paying customers... are we still going forward with this tomorrow??? No, they are just ignoring the bears bitching about having their golden goose castrated. Too must isk flowing into the economy has been a problem for a while now and the single biggest cause is carriers/supers out in null. Revamping the way anoms work to stop this is a big task and will take too much time so they went with the easier option and nuked the problem ships. This is not the worst change they have done, not even close. If you want your firepower back then start pushing for anoms to be revamped so they cannot flood the market with isk. Well, this happens when you don't give new end content to players for years, more and more challenging stuff in every x period of time. (How other games do.) Giving more end content makes you fly more expensive ships, risk more isk, buy morre expensive fit on them...etc. A new loot system (with bind to player pve stuff only available through npc market) would redraw tonz of ingame isk from the game. Such as boosters...sell these kind of things and market isk problem solved in days.
No, it is not lack of "new content". It is a problem with carriers/supers when used for ratting.
I agree it is not good to screw over carrier/super pilots with respect to PvP. And I would really prefer it if CCP looked into alternative solutions. But posting nonsense, rage jibberish, and so forth is not going to convince CCP.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6618
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 09:48:30 -
[54] - Quote
lolzz Quekz wrote:baltec1 wrote:M3tamorph wrote:Is CCP really ignoring all this posts and will not give a flying "panda" about the players and their opinions?
It's obvious that this will be worst change CCP already forced their paying customers... are we still going forward with this tomorrow??? No, they are just ignoring the bears bitching about having their golden goose castrated. Too must isk flowing into the economy has been a problem for a while now and the single biggest cause is carriers/supers out in null. Revamping the way anoms work to stop this is a big task and will take too much time so they went with the easier option and nuked the problem ships. This is not the worst change they have done, not even close. If you want your firepower back then start pushing for anoms to be revamped so they cannot flood the market with isk. issue is they didnt nuke all the problem ships they only nuked the elitist problem ships which are also the end game some players are work towards. if they really wanted to control the isk income just nerf the ticks and that would be way easier than nerfing fighters. and if they truly want to shut everyone up on this issue they should just issue a detailed report on bounty payout based on ship class by simply saying 140m tick must be super ratting and using it as a basis that all carrier and super carriers are making the same is not justifiable
Nonsense.
Look at the data FFS. ISK growth was pretty much flat for quite some time.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6618
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 09:51:49 -
[55] - Quote
Petros K wrote:Start MiddleEndPlus about 200M in true sansha stuff , that makes it almost 1B in 21hours . VNI , 5months old noob player . Super chill ratting , i watched Logan (2+half hours movie , bet you cant do that while you rat with carrier ) 3 Episodes of Blood-C ALOT YOUTUBE ALOT OF CHATTINGS Ate breakfast , lunch and dinner . Drunk 3 coffees Played alot of matches in HS (also got a legendary card from pack! ) Sure , carriers is the problem .....
Now what is the same with a carrier ratting the same amount of time?
Seriously, you take an extreme case and pretend it is the norm.
Like I said, please do not go full moron.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6618
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 09:58:00 -
[56] - Quote
lolzz Quekz wrote:
please attribute that to carrier ratting
like i mentioned unless ccp throw the statistics to indicate that carriers are the true cost to the spike that the only way to shut everyone up but shutting isk income and killing a ship pvp-wise along the way is just not justifiable
Again, for most of 2016 ISK growth was flat...when VNI an Ishtars were around. Plenty of people could use them. Yet ISK growth was nearly flat. If drone boats in general were the problem...why was ISK growth so flat?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6618
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 10:02:35 -
[57] - Quote
blaedin jordan wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Petros K wrote:Start MiddleEndPlus about 200M in true sansha stuff , that makes it almost 1B in 21hours . VNI , 5months old noob player . Super chill ratting , i watched Logan (2+half hours movie , bet you cant do that while you rat with carrier ) 3 Episodes of Blood-C ALOT YOUTUBE ALOT OF CHATTINGS Ate breakfast , lunch and dinner . Drunk 3 coffees Played alot of matches in HS (also got a legendary card from pack! ) Sure , carriers is the problem ..... Now what is the same with a carrier ratting the same amount of time? Seriously, you take an extreme case and pretend it is the norm. Like I said, please do not go full moron. First of all, carrier ratting is NOT afk. You quickly lose more fighters than you earn in any anom if you try it, not to mention you have to actively send the fighters at targets... Second, Paladins, Golems, Tengus, Rattlesnakes, and the list goes on...are ALL capable of making the same kind of ISK carriers can in an anom. Carriers are popular because they have jump drives, are end-game ships, look cool, and most people have trained for a year or longer to fly them. Nerfing carriers, and I mean this literally, isn't going to dent ISK generation. You'd have to be absolutely dense to think that enterprising players aren't going to quickly adapt and move around the nerf. It's the dang principle that's the issue. CCP tried to slip this in an the last minute, bypassed our CSM, and made some stupid lie about how 1% of the players are the only one's affected (think of all the dudes in renting corps, low sec corps/alliances, wormholes, etc that use carriers too). Sure, ISK generation has skyrocketed. Their graph shows this, but have you thought to consider maybe it's because nullsec mechanics are garbage and warfare has basically ground to a halt? Why is that? ASK FOZZIE!
No, it is the ISK entering the economy. You want it to be anything but your ISK printer. You are dodging, weaving, and bullshitting with nonsense.
Do you think that CCP can't do the following:
Graph ISK via ratting by ship type? I'm guessing they can. They did, and they said, "Whoops...****. Gotta fix that."
I'll grant you the fix is bad in that it gimps the ships for PVP. But that aside, those ships needed to be gimped for PVE/printing ISK. You were doing too much of it. Enjoy the ISK you got and stop complaining. The party's over and CCP took away the punch bowl.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6618
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 10:14:32 -
[58] - Quote
Bron Ander Haltern wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:lolzz Quekz wrote:
please attribute that to carrier ratting
like i mentioned unless ccp throw the statistics to indicate that carriers are the true cost to the spike that the only way to shut everyone up but shutting isk income and killing a ship pvp-wise along the way is just not justifiable
Again, for most of 2016 ISK growth was flat...when VNI an Ishtars were around. Plenty of people could use them. Yet ISK growth was nearly flat. If drone boats in general were the problem...why was ISK growth so flat? That is just your speculations only not hard data. Probably CCP just follow your thoughts path and that is just truly sad. Plus one can earn twice as much isks smart bombing havens than ratting in a super. Unless CCP shows data that clearly says super/carriers are the main cause, the economy argument that stands behind the cut is ridiculous period. Another sad thing is that whenever any constructive post will apear in this thread on the forum immidiately 2 or 3 persons with a lot of likes post tons of answers with long quotations covering it with gibberish :(.
FFS, CCP Quant has made the data available in the Dev Blog.
Jesus, you can get it here.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6618
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 10:15:44 -
[59] - Quote
blaedin jordan wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:blaedin jordan wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Petros K wrote:Start MiddleEndPlus about 200M in true sansha stuff , that makes it almost 1B in 21hours . VNI , 5months old noob player . Super chill ratting , i watched Logan (2+half hours movie , bet you cant do that while you rat with carrier ) 3 Episodes of Blood-C ALOT YOUTUBE ALOT OF CHATTINGS Ate breakfast , lunch and dinner . Drunk 3 coffees Played alot of matches in HS (also got a legendary card from pack! ) Sure , carriers is the problem ..... Now what is the same with a carrier ratting the same amount of time? Seriously, you take an extreme case and pretend it is the norm. Like I said, please do not go full moron. First of all, carrier ratting is NOT afk. You quickly lose more fighters than you earn in any anom if you try it, not to mention you have to actively send the fighters at targets... Second, Paladins, Golems, Tengus, Rattlesnakes, and the list goes on...are ALL capable of making the same kind of ISK carriers can in an anom. Carriers are popular because they have jump drives, are end-game ships, look cool, and most people have trained for a year or longer to fly them. Nerfing carriers, and I mean this literally, isn't going to dent ISK generation. You'd have to be absolutely dense to think that enterprising players aren't going to quickly adapt and move around the nerf. It's the dang principle that's the issue. CCP tried to slip this in an the last minute, bypassed our CSM, and made some stupid lie about how 1% of the players are the only one's affected (think of all the dudes in renting corps, low sec corps/alliances, wormholes, etc that use carriers too). Sure, ISK generation has skyrocketed. Their graph shows this, but have you thought to consider maybe it's because nullsec mechanics are garbage and warfare has basically ground to a halt? Why is that? ASK FOZZIE! No, it is the ISK entering the economy. You want it to be anything but your ISK printer. You are dodging, weaving, and bullshitting with nonsense. Do you think that CCP can't do the following: Graph ISK via ratting by ship type? I'm guessing they can. They did, and they said, "Whoops...****. Gotta fix that." I'll grant you the fix is bad in that it gimps the ships for PVP. But that aside, those ships needed to be gimped for PVE/printing ISK. You were doing too much of it. Enjoy the ISK you got and stop complaining. The party's over and CCP took away the punch bowl. Your attempts to become an apologist for these devs and this horrendous nerf fall flat. Carriers don't print isk, they run anoms at the same speed as mauraders, and if anything enjoy a larger tank...but that doesn't help kill anything, does it? And yes, your right in that the nerf applies to PvP, which is probably the larger reason this nerf happened in the 1st place--to neuter Goon, PL, and other super-alliances capital fleets by 20% damage across the board for carriers and 10% for supercaps. But to sit here and insinuate that the next graph isn't going to show the ISK "printing" hasn't shifted from carriers to (one of many other options next) is naive. So keep making excuses for them if you want, but don't expect people to believe you. If there's too much ISK coming into the game, they should fix sov mechanics so people are blowing things up again and work to add isk sinks. NOT to announce giant nerfs to ships people spent months on end training to get into 3 days before they go live--without testing--and without input from our elected CSM representatives.
Go look at the data.
ISK entering the economy has increased by 757%
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6619
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 10:17:57 -
[60] - Quote
lolzz Quekz wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:lolzz Quekz wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:lolzz Quekz wrote:
please attribute that to carrier ratting
like i mentioned unless ccp throw the statistics to indicate that carriers are the true cost to the spike that the only way to shut everyone up but shutting isk income and killing a ship pvp-wise along the way is just not justifiable
Again, for most of 2016 ISK growth was flat...when VNI an Ishtars were around. Plenty of people could use them. Yet ISK growth was nearly flat. If drone boats in general were the problem...why was ISK growth so flat? have you considered that some might graduated into multibox SB ratting? and also political climate potentially encouraging/allowing more people to rat in relative safety in bigger ships? similarly it was quoted that some alliances are encouraging full on rat mode in prep of the coming winter wars when moon mining is out can it be the cause of a sudden spike? moon mining was introduced in march the same time the spike started Not to this extent. If anything the argument: "Go rate like crazy we'll be having lots of wars" kinda fits with the narrative "carriers and supers are the problem." People went straight to the optimal ship for ISK printing. As I pointed out a few pages back. The average monthly ISK growth was about 7 trillion ISK. Now last month it was 53 trillion. That is a 757% increase. 757%. Because people are in full ratting mode? Yeah...not buying explanation. Considering that kind of increase has NEVER been seen before. never seen before doesnt mean it cannot be the case esp given the accessibility of carrier and things like rattlesnakes coming down to around 400m hull(before the recent pirate nerf) compared to the last couple of years and all the blue donuts around as of late is potentially an open door to allow lower sp toons bigger toys to play with. i am relatively new to eve so i want want to argue too much on the case as my knowledge is limited i am just putting out observable facts and providing idea to improve the mechanics to still keep carriers alive cause carrier were my end goal even if i cant rat in it i wanna fly it out and do some good
In 65 months we have not seen this sudden jump in the growth if ISK...and suddenly it is okay?
You are just simply wrong. That kind of growth in the money supply, if sustained, will be devastating in terms of inflation. Go look at the Chinese server were botting is completely allowed and ISK is flowing into the economy at unprecedented rates. PLEX were several multiples of what they cost on Tranquility and that was several years ago.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6619
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 10:22:28 -
[61] - Quote
I know most people here are averse to looking at the data...but you can find it here.
The money supply grew rapidly last month. We saw some pretty wild swings recently with Alpha clones lining up with a surge in the money supply. A big drop when citadels were released (everyone and their Uncle Bob buying up blueprints). There is no similar explanation with the recent rise in the money supply.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6619
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 10:24:19 -
[62] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:
ISK entering the economy has increased by 757%
new sov makes people grind to get indexes up, how much of this is down to replacing lost stuff and the need to grind for sov defenses? something must be done that's for sure, can't sustain a 757% rise
Oh FFS. New sov has been around for longer than last month.
Next stupid explanation?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6626
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 15:13:08 -
[63] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:
In 65 months we have not seen this sudden jump in the growth if ISK...and suddenly it is okay?
You are just simply wrong. That kind of growth in the money supply, if sustained, will be devastating in terms of inflation. Go look at the Chinese server were botting is completely allowed and ISK is flowing into the economy at unprecedented rates. PLEX were several multiples of what they cost on Tranquility and that was several years ago.
You can also freely buy characters, Ships and anything else we can't by exchanging RL money with another player. This has NOTHING to do with TQ, it is down to Chinese EULA being modified to suit Chinese regulations. (Techos, stop trying to defend CCP with bullshite excuses) CCP's idea of game "balance" is to make it so the richest largest groups will ALWAYS win the day. 4 nerfs to owning a pirate battleship in ONE release - If that isn't "balance" biased toward the rich, what is? Carriers nerfed into the ground for both PVP and PVE when part of the reason isk income has gone up is due to a coming release advertised by CCP that fundamentally changes the way alliances fight (moon mining and bottom up income) CCP caused the problem and are blaming and punishing players for their poor game design.
And another economic ignoramus.
Yes, people can do things on the Chinese server they can't do here and that leads to ALOT of ISK entering the economy and there being lots of inflation.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6626
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 15:19:36 -
[64] - Quote
Petros K wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Petros K wrote:Start MiddleEndPlus about 200M in true sansha stuff , that makes it almost 1B in 21hours . VNI , 5months old noob player . Super chill ratting , i watched Logan (2+half hours movie , bet you cant do that while you rat with carrier ) 3 Episodes of Blood-C ALOT YOUTUBE ALOT OF CHATTINGS Ate breakfast , lunch and dinner . Drunk 3 coffees Played alot of matches in HS (also got a legendary card from pack! ) Sure , carriers is the problem ..... Now what is the same with a carrier ratting the same amount of time? Seriously, you take an extreme case and pretend it is the norm. Like I said, please do not go full moron. Maybe its you the one who is moron because you miss the big picture , YES what i am showing you is an extreme thing but its POSSIBLE . 1Bil in 20hours , 500M in 12hours , 250M in 6hours . With what? A 130M cost ship that you can fly with very little skills (not more that 3 months if well planned even for a new/noob player ) . The time needed is 3x more than ratting with carrier , but being (semi)afk negates the feeling of passing time . The main argument is "too much ISK entering the game" , what other proof you need to convince that the ISK printing methods arent the carriers ? Although i hate this nerf/patch . i wish to happen . Only to prove that economy wont change abit .
Sure extremes are possible...so what? The question really is, "Where is this ISK coming from?" CCP is saying carriers and supers.
Pretty much everyone else is saying, "CCP is lying because :reasons:!!!!"
But why would CCP lie? Why deliberately **** of players, why deliberately risk having so many leave the game...for something that is not true and won't help the situation? Tears? GMAFB. IRL you can't sell tears, you can't buy anything with them. Money talks, bullshit walks.
Oh, and if a carrier is 3x as efficient as a single VNI, you can make that 250 million ISK and only rat for 2 hours giving you back 4 hours of leisure time. You'd be a complete dumbass or have no life not to make that trade.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6626
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 15:22:22 -
[65] - Quote
Valdr Auduin wrote:Petros K wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Petros K wrote:Start MiddleEndPlus about 200M in true sansha stuff , that makes it almost 1B in 21hours . VNI , 5months old noob player . Super chill ratting , i watched Logan (2+half hours movie , bet you cant do that while you rat with carrier ) 3 Episodes of Blood-C ALOT YOUTUBE ALOT OF CHATTINGS Ate breakfast , lunch and dinner . Drunk 3 coffees Played alot of matches in HS (also got a legendary card from pack! ) Sure , carriers is the problem ..... Now what is the same with a carrier ratting the same amount of time? Seriously, you take an extreme case and pretend it is the norm. Like I said, please do not go full moron. Maybe its you the one who is moron because you miss the big picture , YES what i am showing you is an extreme thing but its POSSIBLE . 1Bil in 20hours , 500M in 12hours , 250M in 6hours . With what? A 130M cost ship that you can fly with very little skills (not more that 3 months if well planned even for a new/noob player ) . The time needed is 3x more than ratting with carrier , but being (semi)afk negates the feeling of passing time . The main argument is "too much ISK entering the game" , what other proof you need to convince that the ISK printing methods arent the carriers ? Although i hate this nerf/patch . i wish to happen . Only to prove that economy wont change abit . Your method is also scaleable across alts where a carrier isn't, the time-cost is irrelevant when you can double your number of PLEX'd subs every day. And no I'm not discounting the training time, that's irrelevant when skill injectors exist and each VNI is making 500 Plex a day. The VNI multi-box is a runaway exploit, carriers just make one single account very efficient to farm.
Good lord....
The costs also scale....linearly--i.e. there are no economies of scale here, if anything there maybe diseconomies of scale. That is as you use more alts each one becomes slightly less productive as attention is divided, and that divided attention may result in a higher likelihood of ship loss reducing your net gains.
Christ, you people really love your straws don't you.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6626
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 15:25:19 -
[66] - Quote
Side1Bu2Rnz9 wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:I know most people here are averse to looking at the data...but you can find it here. The money supply grew rapidly last month. We saw some pretty wild swings recently with Alpha clones lining up with a surge in the money supply. A big drop when citadels were released (everyone and their Uncle Bob buying up blueprints). There is no similar explanation with the recent rise in the money supply. A cold war caused by a TERRIBLE sov mechanics has a tendency to also cause an increase in the amount of money generation. Maybe you should try to find the problem and not do what CCP is doing by putting bandaids on a symptom... You're also naive if you don't think people will just move back to "printing ISK" in semi-AFK drone boats instead of carriers. Carriers were never the most efficient ISK per effort in the game, but it allowed people to play on one account and make the same amount of ISK per hour as running 3-4 accounts using VNIs. Carriers were a click fest, but they were perfect for the person who maybe can't play 20 hours a day or run multiple accounts. The only thing CCP will do with this patch is nerf carrier's PVP ability and forced the customer base to adapt to multi-boxing 3-4 accounts using semi-afk drone boats instead...
You don't see the inherent contradiction in your post there do you? A carrier was good for a person who can't afford to pay for his sub, but he'll expand his accounts by 3 or 4...and find the money somewhere? Never mind that using VNIs are less efficient meaning he'll have to rate even longer for each of these accounts to PLEX them.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6627
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 15:27:21 -
[67] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:RKJakTup wrote:
not really, i see what your trying to say but they can do it where you cant use caps to do some type of end game just by adding gates. and they can drop supcap mods to bring up the value of subcaps in pve and isk gathering. witch in turn ups the isk value of the ship witch is risk = reward
Add gates and you make the problem of not being able to catch anyone bigger. What they could do is make this change as a temporary fix and then move to make anoms unfarmable for supers by adding dreadnoughts that don't have a bounty that spawn if a capital is on grid. They then unerf carriers and supers.
I like it.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6628
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:50:38 -
[68] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:UPDATE 2017-07-12: Reduced the damage reduction to fighters. Added supporting data. The Data:LetGÇÖs set the stage for the decision by taking sample of 5 days in June. During that timeframe 10.6 Trillion ISK was rewarded in bounties. Of that: - 22.3% (2.3T) of the ISK was generated by 1.4% of characters earning bounties, using Supercarriers
- 24.2% (2.6T) of the ISK was generated by 4.8% of characters earning bounties, using Carriers
- 19.1% (2T) of the ISK was generated by 16.6% of characters earning bounties, using T1 Cruisers
Just under half (46.5%) of the bounties earned during the time period was generated by Supercarriers and Carriers, meaning a small percent of the population received a huge portion of the total bounties. When 6ish % of people engaged in bounty generating activity account for almost HALF of all bounties injecting isk into EVE's economy, it's time for the nerf hammer to fall. Of course CCP caved and in the same post announced that they were pulling back on some of the nerfing. That's a mistake, it's just going to prolong the issue to the point where more drastic nerfing is going to be needed later. You rip a bandaid off, trying to peel it slowly and nicely just makes it worse.
:smug:
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6628
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:56:00 -
[69] - Quote
Valdr Auduin wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Side1Bu2Rnz9 wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:I know most people here are averse to looking at the data...but you can find it here. The money supply grew rapidly last month. We saw some pretty wild swings recently with Alpha clones lining up with a surge in the money supply. A big drop when citadels were released (everyone and their Uncle Bob buying up blueprints). There is no similar explanation with the recent rise in the money supply. A cold war caused by a TERRIBLE sov mechanics has a tendency to also cause an increase in the amount of money generation. Maybe you should try to find the problem and not do what CCP is doing by putting bandaids on a symptom... You're also naive if you don't think people will just move back to "printing ISK" in semi-AFK drone boats instead of carriers. Carriers were never the most efficient ISK per effort in the game, but it allowed people to play on one account and make the same amount of ISK per hour as running 3-4 accounts using VNIs. Carriers were a click fest, but they were perfect for the person who maybe can't play 20 hours a day or run multiple accounts. The only thing CCP will do with this patch is nerf carrier's PVP ability and forced the customer base to adapt to multi-boxing 3-4 accounts using semi-afk drone boats instead... You don't see the inherent contradiction in your post there do you? A carrier was good for a person who can't afford to pay for his sub, but he'll expand his accounts by 3 or 4...and find the money somewhere? Never mind that using VNIs are less efficient meaning he'll have to rate even longer for each of these accounts to PLEX them. Yes, but VNI-ratting is sustainable over longer periods to the point, as demonstrated, of breaking the cost margin.
So let me get this straight....the guy who is having issues paying his sub is going to spend more time ratting (you can't totally AFK rat in a VNI no matter how much you guys lie about it) AND he is going to have more accounts.
Maybe he should...oh I don't know....go get a better job or something instead of spending more time in his mom's basement.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6631
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 19:53:45 -
[70] - Quote
Sassura wrote:Teckos Pech
So let me get this straight....the guy who is having issues paying his sub is going to spend more time ratting (you can't totally AFK rat in a VNI no matter how much you guys lie about it) AND he is going to have more accounts.
Maybe he should...oh I don't know....go get a better job or something instead of spending more time in his mom's basement. [:roll: wrote:
When you have to resort to comments about peoples real life jobs and 'moms basement' comments it seems that you are out of reasonable and factual comments. Your posts read more like reddit posts. There are people whose opinions I do not necessarily agree with that I enjoy interacting with, ingame and on the forums. Their posts give me fresh insight into other perspectives and widen my thinking. It's a pleasure to banter with them. They in turn, for the most part. can express themselves without falling back to insults. It's a shame that you Sir, are not one of those people. It would give your posts more credibility.
It is called better allocating your time...like an adult. If you are having that kind of difficulty, then playing MORE of a video game is not really a very responsible choice.
Further, "balancing" the game around such players is also not very reasonable as it has the potential to wreck the in game economy.
Maybe if all the butthurt players threatening to quite actually became more reasonable we could have that civil discussion. But most people here have their heads firmly ensconced between their buttocks and are working over time to pretend this problem is not a problem.
A 757% increase in the growth rate of the money supply over the average is nowhere near Goddamn reasonable.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6631
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 20:13:34 -
[71] - Quote
Hogeron Amelan wrote:you guys from CCP have to learn how to read graphs...
When you average the increase in ISK since the citadel upgrade, aka since carriers and supers can generate ISK the way they do now (May 2016 - June 2017), roughtly estimated 1085T-960T=125 T ISK in 13 months what equals 9,6T or lets say rougly 10T ISK/month since May 2016.
When you compare the months before, (Oct 2014- Apr. 2016) thats about 790-600T = 190T in 17 months, what equals about 11,2T per month so thats over 10% more than we have now. So in which mathematical universe you are living to say that 11,2 is less than 10 that the actual income situation is not tolerable when there was even more income generated per month before the carrier change? Of cause when you see the smooth lines before the citadel patch and the edgy lines after it, you can see that people are struggeling with a constant method for income, meaning that the game content is rapidly shifting between making Isk and loosing it.
Would you please add a 30-day-playtime cost development graph to that one please? Maybe then you will find out why people are up to increase their income in short periods of time and you may think about it how to introduce game mechanics for a more stable economy. Instead of fine-tuning with a precision tool you are ripping of vavles and soldering rips in the pipes of the material flow...
The average growth rate in the money supply up to Nov. 2016 is about 7 trillion. After that there is considerably more volatility. However, for May 2017 the money supply for just characters grew 53 trillion. That is a huge increase. Using the updated OP and the ratios there as a crude measure of that 53 trillion about 24-25 trillion came from carriers, about 10 trillion from T1 cruisers. And the rest from all other ships. And if there were 2,000 characters ratting in carriers and supers, that is over 12.3 billion on average per character for one month.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6631
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 20:16:18 -
[72] - Quote
Well at least people are not looking at the data...
BTW you can download the daily numbers from the Devblog. The money supply numbers are in a csv file and everyone should be able to look at in Excel or Google Sheets.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6632
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 20:26:27 -
[73] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Hogeron Amelan wrote:you guys from CCP have to learn how to read graphs...
When you average the increase in ISK since the citadel upgrade, aka since carriers and supers can generate ISK the way they do now (May 2016 - June 2017), roughtly estimated 1085T-960T=125 T ISK in 13 months what equals 9,6T or lets say rougly 10T ISK/month since May 2016.
When you compare the months before, (Oct 2014- Apr. 2016) thats about 790-600T = 190T in 17 months, what equals about 11,2T per month so thats over 10% more than we have now. So in which mathematical universe you are living to say that 11,2 is less than 10 that the actual income situation is not tolerable when there was even more income generated per month before the carrier change? Of cause when you see the smooth lines before the citadel patch and the edgy lines after it, you can see that people are struggeling with a constant method for income, meaning that the game content is rapidly shifting between making Isk and loosing it.
Would you please add a 30-day-playtime cost development graph to that one please? Maybe then you will find out why people are up to increase their income in short periods of time and you may think about it how to introduce game mechanics for a more stable economy. Instead of fine-tuning with a precision tool you are ripping of vavles and soldering rips in the pipes of the material flow... The average growth rate in the money supply up to Nov. 2016 is about 7 trillion. After that there is considerably more volatility. However, for May 2017 the money supply for just characters grew 53 trillion. That is a huge increase. Using the updated OP and the ratios there as a crude measure of that 53 trillion about 24-25 trillion came from carriers, about 10 trillion from T1 cruisers. And the rest from all other ships. And if there were 2,000 characters ratting in carriers and supers, that is over 12.3 billion on average per character for one month. You my friend need to stop posting now - Using the updated OP is not even close to accurate. So any numbers you magically pulled out of it are also inaccurate..
Yes, because they do not agree with your preconceived beliefs they must be wrong.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6632
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 20:27:30 -
[74] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Hogeron Amelan wrote:you guys from CCP have to learn how to read graphs...
When you average the increase in ISK since the citadel upgrade, aka since carriers and supers can generate ISK the way they do now (May 2016 - June 2017), roughtly estimated 1085T-960T=125 T ISK in 13 months what equals 9,6T or lets say rougly 10T ISK/month since May 2016.
When you compare the months before, (Oct 2014- Apr. 2016) thats about 790-600T = 190T in 17 months, what equals about 11,2T per month so thats over 10% more than we have now. So in which mathematical universe you are living to say that 11,2 is less than 10 that the actual income situation is not tolerable when there was even more income generated per month before the carrier change? Of cause when you see the smooth lines before the citadel patch and the edgy lines after it, you can see that people are struggeling with a constant method for income, meaning that the game content is rapidly shifting between making Isk and loosing it.
Would you please add a 30-day-playtime cost development graph to that one please? Maybe then you will find out why people are up to increase their income in short periods of time and you may think about it how to introduce game mechanics for a more stable economy. Instead of fine-tuning with a precision tool you are ripping of vavles and soldering rips in the pipes of the material flow... The average growth rate in the money supply up to Nov. 2016 is about 7 trillion. After that there is considerably more volatility. However, for May 2017 the money supply for just characters grew 53 trillion. That is a huge increase. Using the updated OP and the ratios there as a crude measure of that 53 trillion about 24-25 trillion came from carriers, about 10 trillion from T1 cruisers. And the rest from all other ships. And if there were 2,000 characters ratting in carriers and supers, that is over 12.3 billion on average per character for one month. You my friend need to stop posting now - Using the updated OP is not even close to accurate. So any numbers you magically pulled out of it are also inaccurate.. How do you know it's not accurate? You are always mad when carriers get nerfed but that does not mean you can pretend the data is not accurate just because.
And the implication is that all the data is wrong too. All of it. Every MER. And that everyone at CCP are drooling morons who can't write queries and do basic arithmetic.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6635
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 21:39:00 -
[75] - Quote
Eric Lemmonte wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Eric Lemmonte wrote:Looking at some of those graphs they have on https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/monthly-economic-report-may-2017/ makes me wonder if they could fix this issue with tweaking manufacture numbers somehow. Both bounty and produced good prices have gone up in a very similar profile this last year. It looks to me that people are ratting the best way they can to pay for these ever increasing costs to buy produced goods. You still have time to fix this. Don't be hasty and make such a drastic change without first thinking it over. I see that online player counts have dwindled over the years and I can't help but think that CCP is getting anxious that they're starting to lose their cash cow. Right now we're down to the same number of online players as back in 2008. Please don't turn into another EA or Activision. Just make a quality game and you will keep a loyal player base. These wild changes you keep doing is making this a bumpy road for everyone So...manufacturers should be screwed over because you are putting too much ISK into the economy with your carrier or super. That is reasonable to you? Really? Lets screw over players who are not causing the problem and let those who are continue on making a mess. And you do realize that the CPI has been essentially flat for like that last 6 months to a year, right? Oh, and that is likely an overstatement of inflation as CCP use, IIRC, a Laspreyes index which can have issues with being upwardly biased. You're jumping to conclusions a little fast aren't you? They could easily change mineral requirements for ships, modules, and the like... That would mean more isk in the MINER pocket, probably the same or more for the manufacturer, and it would eat away isk from the bounty payouts.
So now we are to change more things that aren't causing the problem to fix the problem.
Tell me do you work in Washington D.C. because you have the perfect set of "problem solving" skills.
Why not just turn of the fountain that is letting huge amounts of ISK gush into the economy. Oh wait, that would actually make sense.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6635
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 21:43:18 -
[76] - Quote
Martehh wrote:Look according to your graph there is over a quadrillion amount of isk in New eden. Now you have to ask yourself how is this nerf even going to matter on a macro scale, the answer is it is not. Content drives this game not isk, we are seeing anomalous figures because the content is stale. The content in this game is stale because the sov system does not encourage large entities to fight each other. The quality of small gang pvp is interdependent on large entities in this game going kinetic at each other. CCP you are building a house without a strong foundation it will collapse. Your number one priority is sov at this point, unless you want to take the game in a drastically different pubbie direction.
If the money supply grows too fast you'll end up with inflation....potentially alot of inflation, especially if players feel they need to carrier/super rat to keep up--i.e. a positive feedback loop.
You need to look at flows, not stocks. If you don't know those two terms, GTFO.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6635
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 21:48:32 -
[77] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Are you sure? I ran incursions for a long time and made around the same isk PH (more if you include Concord LP) out of them as I do ratting in my super. For a lot less isk outlay, less competition for sites and way less risk..
What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? Incursion payouts are tracked separately from bounty prizes, and the data was specifically about bounty prizes. They may be tracked separately but are still paid as bounties.. And pay more PH than carrier ratting which makes Devs assertion that carriers need to be nerfed because they earn too much a straight out lie.. If incursions aren't included there is even more reason for Larrikin to show accurate and complete statistics for his 5 day period rather than an anomalous %. Dishonesty as to motives has been a thing with CCP and this thread is a prime example of it.,. Either way, this change is going to have detrimental affects right across the game - It not only affects ratters but every income stream associated with carriers and Supers in addition to market sales.. All my bling fits (most of my ships are either faction or deadspace fit) are being broken down to T2. Previews of potential new doctrines after the Pirate ship changes are T2 or at best a mix of faction and T2 (cheap and disposable). This will also impact markets as players can no longer afford those bling fits. ...are you just outright missing the (flat and considerably smaller) incursion data line on that chart, or are you just refusing to incorporate that information into your worldview?
I'm going to guess both. His blinkered world view won't let him see the data line. Were incursions causing a problem in March 2016? No. April 2016? No. May 2016? No. Is there any indication that incursions were a potential source of high inflation? No.
Okay, lets nerf incursions!
It is amazing because it is actually the exact same thing everyone is accusing CCP of doing. Of course, CCP has numbers on their side. Which is why the numbers have to be declared fake.
It is refreshing to see that people really are this blinkered. When given data that literally goes against their beliefs and statements it is the data that is wrong, not their beliefs. Nope, can't be those.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6635
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 22:00:16 -
[78] - Quote
Videles Silenthunter wrote:Drak'Eisgvarde Crepari wrote:Ridiculous. 100T change over the past year or so which is the norm for the past several years.
How about fixing the isk sinks instead? Things like market taxes took a hit with citadels.
Up the items bought from NPCs with isk, particularly cosmetic ones. New skins, a mix of LP and isk (or just isk). New clothes with isk.
Maybe change up t2 citadel rigs and give them less T2 salvage but some NPC sold items.
Have it cost isk to unlock additional jump clones, not just take a skill. 1000 isk for the first. 10b isk for the 10th.
Have additional bonus remaps that can be bought for isk. Maybe allow different clones with different remaps, for a substantial isk price.
Increase the array of hardwirings, particularly for slots 6-10. so many ways to drain isk. @Dev you should hire someone like this
So we should nerf the game for those not causing the problem?
Yeah that makes sense.
Jesus...
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6638
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 22:27:31 -
[79] - Quote
Beast of Revelations wrote:
- What about not letting the damn things in anoms in the first place? Wouldn't that be better?
- What about changing some numbers so that the rats blast the fighters out of the sky at a much higher rate?
- What about bringing back a triage module so that the damn thing has to be immobile for minutes at a time to deploy fighters to any effect?
Fine. Fine. Uhhh...fine, I guess.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6638
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 22:45:55 -
[80] - Quote
Mossyblog Barnes wrote:*sigh*
Can you please hire a someone who understands statistical analysis.
Taking a "snapshot" from 5 days in "June" is like looking at your bank account during St Paddys day and declaring you have a years worth of drinking behaviour.
Qualitative Analysis. Please please get a book on this and come back to us with some concrete evidence that doesn't orbit Delve and Goons.
The daily data is there to download and it is not good. Average amount of ISK entering the economy on a monthly basis up to November 2016 7 trillion. In May 2017, 53 trillion or about a 757% increase. Further, the first 5 days of June are showing another month with a high growth rate for ISK.
Further, in looking at the daily data, after about mid April the number of days with negative ISK growth virtually disappeared, whereas before they were more frequent and of larger magnitude.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6638
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 23:55:54 -
[81] - Quote
KIller Wabbit wrote:Teckos Pech wrote: And the implication is that all the data is wrong too. All of it. Every MER. And that everyone at CCP are drooling morons who can't write queries and do basic arithmetic.
I just heard a podcast where it was stated that they have been trying to correct CCP's data for a long time. Apparently, it has been wrong or incorrectly interpreted.
Source?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6644
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 04:16:04 -
[82] - Quote
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:Jo Kiyoko wrote:This demonstrates a new face from developers who can't commit to an announcement, and then lie and cave in to intimidation from its players, with a company with dwindling integrity can we trust CCP anymore these days? So you would rather CCP not listen to players at all than only listen when there's enough outrage that hundreds of players are quitting?
Self-centered entitled players who are screaming about their isk stream being nerfed should never ever be listened too.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6644
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 04:19:53 -
[83] - Quote
Valaba wrote:
You talk too much. Get a life dude. Rediculous number of posts whining about players with carriers.
And you are a self centered man child who should have grown up long ago.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6644
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 04:20:44 -
[84] - Quote
Eric Lemmonte wrote:I like how we all are punished because of goons' unchallenged ratting.
Top 10 regions for bounties.
Delve8.76918E+1212.14% Deklein4.46455E+126.18% Branch3.11909E+124.32% Cobalt Edge2.96567E+124.11% Outer Passage2.66506E+123.69% Querious2.6635E+123.69% Feythabolis2.60413E+123.61% Period Basis2.46879E+123.42% Providence2.45647E+123.40% Esoteria2.37196E+123.28%
Yes, because 44 trillion ISK entering the economy would not have been a problem at all.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6644
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 04:23:32 -
[85] - Quote
Mossyblog Barnes wrote:@CCP Larrikin,
I can see you're stating to take a long term view and like all economies you pull the leaver that shudders the most vs one big leaver that fixes all. However, taking the temperature of Delve and declaring all of Eve a risk is where the logic falls short. Cumualtive sure the data trends upwards but the rate of logins trend downwards and i'd wager the kill/death ratio(s) also have a different story (haven't downloaded the entirity of the data set as yet).
Capping the main sources of ISK will slow total wealth and achieve the goal you're attempting to do in terms of reduce the wealth overall, however you lose accounts as a result and / or the attractors to new customer acquisition also takes a hit.
The trade off is where all of this simply falls short. CCP takes away but what does it provide in return? how does this wealth get redirected?
Why is Delve so high?
The duking of stats serves no purpose but to fuel further negativity. Until you treat the root cause all you're doing is essentially reminding players that the games "rules" are always subject to change which in turn also generates further anxiety about adoption.
Imagine if i kept changing the SDK/Frameworks languages you use to build the game?
Inflation destroys wealth on the whole, it does not create it.
And even if ratting in Delve was completely and totally stopped by CCP there would still be too much ISK entering the economy. This is a little bit too much, this a huge ginormous amount of too much ISK entering the economy.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6645
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 04:43:21 -
[86] - Quote
Mossyblog Barnes wrote:Cismet wrote:Mossyblog Barnes wrote:*sigh*
Can you please hire a someone who understands statistical analysis.
Taking a "snapshot" from 5 days in "June" is like looking at your bank account during St Paddys day and declaring you have a years worth of drinking behaviour.
Qualitative Analysis. Please please get a book on this and come back to us with some concrete evidence that doesn't orbit Delve and Goons. Actually, 5 days would be a fine sample to use given the number of people playing during the period. It would be over 150k people in the sample given an average 35k online in any given day, likely more over a timezone rolling period. The sample size is more than adequate to be representative within a single-digit margin of error with ease. More data would be nice, but ultimately, it'll only likely be a few percent off in either direction. This implies the data has stability and equates to a consistent median behaviour... .. which...we all can surely see is not the case?
We can see this because....?
And actually PCU is an instantaneous measure, the actual number of players who have logged in during a given day would be larger than the peak PCU number. For example, to see this, imagine we have just 2 hours and in hour 1 30,000 players log in. In hour 2 15,000 players log in. What is the number of unique players who logged in? A number between 30,000 and 45,000 (including the end points).
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6648
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 04:58:43 -
[87] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Mossyblog Barnes wrote:@CCP Larrikin,
I can see you're stating to take a long term view and like all economies you pull the leaver that shudders the most vs one big leaver that fixes all. However, taking the temperature of Delve and declaring all of Eve a risk is where the logic falls short. Cumualtive sure the data trends upwards but the rate of logins trend downwards and i'd wager the kill/death ratio(s) also have a different story (haven't downloaded the entirity of the data set as yet).
Capping the main sources of ISK will slow total wealth and achieve the goal you're attempting to do in terms of reduce the wealth overall, however you lose accounts as a result and / or the attractors to new customer acquisition also takes a hit.
The trade off is where all of this simply falls short. CCP takes away but what does it provide in return? how does this wealth get redirected?
Why is Delve so high?
The duking of stats serves no purpose but to fuel further negativity. Until you treat the root cause all you're doing is essentially reminding players that the games "rules" are always subject to change which in turn also generates further anxiety about adoption.
Imagine if i kept changing the SDK/Frameworks languages you use to build the game? Inflation destroys wealth on the whole, it does not create it. And even if ratting in Delve was completely and totally stopped by CCP there would still be too much ISK entering the economy. This is a little bit too much, this a huge ginormous amount of too much ISK entering the economy. In this case where 2 regions are creating the inflation, it means that while they suffer a minor amount from the inflation, the rest of the game suffers a lot more. You know business as usual in EvE.
It isn't two regions either.
Look, on average the money supply grew at around 7 billion ISK/month. In May it grew 53 trillion. Even if you took out Deklein and Delve you'd still have some over 500% above average.
This is not 2 regions. It is a systemic problem.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6648
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 05:05:01 -
[88] - Quote
Shiloh Templeton wrote:This reminds me of articles in the past that suggested making things more lucrative for carebears would create more opportunities for hunters.
So instead of trying to solve the problem with fixes that try to get people to quit playing the game, how about fixes that make it easier to gank the super PVE'rs?
You mean like when they first introduced Dominion Sov with anomalies and saw the money supply start to increase dramatically and had to nerf anomalies? Like that?
Yeah, that didn't work to well did it?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6649
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 15:12:13 -
[89] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote: Yes it is a systemic problem with 2 regions sticking out like sore thumbs.
Top 10 regions for bounties.
Delve 8.76918E+12 12.14% Deklein 4.46455E+12 6.18% Branch 3.11909E+12 4.32% Cobalt Edge 2.96567E+12 4.11% Outer Passage 2.66506E+12 3.69% Querious 2.6635E+12 3.69% Feythabolis 2.60413E+12 3.61% Period Basis 2.46879E+12 3.42% Providence 2.45647E+12 3.40% Esoteria 2.37196E+12 3.28%
But like all of the over done crap in Null, if CCP ever try to fix it they will be greeted with a waves of tears so great as to make all that have come before it look like a drip in an ocean.
Now the fact that CCP has caved in to the whining in such a huge manner to a massive alteration to the economy done by such a small number of people has shown everyone else that Null still rules supreme and will be given what ever they want if they cry enough about it.
These changes were even approved by the CSM, yet since their change not one word has been uttered by a CSM member.
Again, if it is systemic it is not "2 regions". What those two regions represent is what happens when you have an unbalanced class of ships and organized groups. The organized groups take advantage of the unbalanced ships.
One could go, "Oh XXXX groups should not do that." But that is stupid wishful pie-in-the-sky thinking. People are going to respond to the incentives they encounter. Expecting them to not respond in this way is to expect people to not be people.
At the end of the day, way too much ISK is entering the economy. From what regions or from whom is largely irrelevant. Because if you try to micro-manage it it probably won't work. What you are going to nerf the top 20 regions? Yeah, that's not going to cause people to quit also....that is just as discriminatory as the carrier/super nerf if not more so.
This thread confirms my view of people in a collective decision making setting. People are short sighted, focused only on what is good for them, screw everyone else, and relying on faulty logic and idiocy. And people wonder why CCP ignores them. Because the vast majority of the views expressed here fall into this category. We have had people argue that a massive increase in the money supply won't cause inflation never mind all the examples to the contrary. We have had people argue the cost of their ship should dictate their ratting rewards which basically creates an incentive for everyone to carrier/supper rat thus exacerbating the problem. Then there are just the pure incoherent rage posts.
Seriously, there have been a number of replies to me, "Yes, but it is your alliance causing the problem!" What does this mean, even if it were true? I'm calling for a nerf on this...and yeah, I'm in GSF. Most rational disinterested people would see it as lending credibility to my statements, but we have exactly the opposite in this thread. How can I not conclude that these people are just blinkered morons who'd shoot themselves in the foot and then proclaim they intended to do that, or even worse, blame somebody else. Seriously, scroll back and see how many GSF members here are complaining. I am not supporting them*. I am saying exactly the opposite--this kind of growth in the money supply has to stop.
This kind of growth in the money supply is way, way too large to let it continue. Sitting around going "Grrr Goons" might make you feel better, but it does nothing to address the problem. At all.
*Unless it is to bar/ban carriers and supers from ratting temporarily while a solution is found that preserves the PvP aspects of carriers and supers...if that is indeed a valid issue.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6649
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 15:17:08 -
[90] - Quote
Feracitus wrote: The underlying problem is the infinite nature of the ISK currency. Limit the money supply by actually limiting the money supply. Transform ISK in a blockchain based cryptocurrency with a market cap and limited supply.
ISK is already a synthetic commodity currency like bit coin. People convert electricity into bit coin, and people convert (leisure) time into ISK. With changes to carriers/supers it looks like it is "too easy" to convert (leisure) time into ISK.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6649
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 17:17:05 -
[91] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Heleana Commodus Luyseyal wrote:CCP should keep on mind that if ppl skilled up for something and invested their real money into it, when they nerf bat that same thing to uselessness, they should refund skill points that are thrown by players. Or at least that is what other companies are doing, like for example blizzards hearthstone. CCP isn't and should not be responsible for people's bad gameplay choices. Like if someone finds a way to use a ship to make 3 billion isk per tick and I skill inject into that ship despite having enough sense to know that CCP is going to nerf that as soon as they are aware of it, CCP would owe me nothing when they fixed the thing i was stupid enough to spend money on. I still remain amazed at the fact the people can play EVE for years watching CCP ruthlessly nerf stuff that is too good and they STILL can't grasp the idea that going for the next big flavor of the month is a stupid idea.
In fact, this is so wildly imbalancing that if somebody found this out, did not tell CCP and kept doing it...ban the feck out of them. And people jumping on and taking advantage of it...ban the feck out of them too.
This is EXACTLY happened to people who were taking advantage of the moon goo bug about 8 or 9 years ago. They noticed that they could get a silo full of reacted moon goo if they set up the connections in a POS in a certain order. No waiting and reacitng, BOOM, instant silo of moon goo. And they used it for quite some time and finally the jig was up and CCP hit a number of people with the ban hammer.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6649
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 17:22:17 -
[92] - Quote
C0ATL wrote:
And you can bet that even after they bump capitals out of the anomalies they wont bother returning the 10% dmg they took. After all Carrier is just a sinonym for Cancer in CCP's dictionary as of late. They woudnt want to give cancer a fighting chance now, would they? :D
Pathetic.
* * *
There have been many players that gave ideas on how to change PVE in order to not need the carrier nerfs. The following is my 2 cents:
Gate every anomaly per ship class... with a variation of Hidden and Forsaken types for those who want more of a challenge for that particular class.
Burrow/Hideaway/Refuge/Den + Hidden/Forsaken variations ---> Frigs Yard/ Rally Point/ Port + Hidden/Forsaken variations ----> Cruisers Hub + Hidden/Forsaken variations ----> Battlecruisers Haven/Sanctum ----> Battleships
This way, you dont need to nerf the entire PVE bounties when you notice that a particular ship type is gaining too much ISK, or nerf the ship itself in pvp by extent. Just reduce bounties or modify NPCs in those particular sites. You would be setting yourself up for an easier tackle of such problems in the future. VNIs and Ishtars wont be able to just AFK rat in Havens and Sanctums --- Sure they will do it in the cruiser designated sites but for less bounty and players will also need to swap sites faster, thus forcing them to more active. Have a few exceptions that can go to all of the above mentioned sites, ignoring class restriction... I.E. T3 cruisers. That way when a group wants to raise their index after capturing territory they cant complain about being forced to play with frigs and whatnot.
Now onto capitals:
Create a new Anomaly Example: Blood Raider Capital Shipyard - restricted to carriers. Spawn 1 NPC dread + occasional waves of elite frigs and/or elite cruisers. Have the waves always aggro player ship instead of Fighters. That way players cant complain about their fighters being one-shotted by the dread while killing the additional spawns, and with the dread hitting a carrier constantly, it also presents a fair cap management and tanking challenge. From all people flying carriers atm, only a few manage to solo dreads and even then it can be problematic and time consuming -- and if multiple carriers enter the same anomaly to make it easier, the bounty gets split and thus, individual ticks are lowered. Multiboxing in carriers is brain melting anyway so you cant have 2nd or 3rd carrier alt helping you out so players would choose between working with a different player or attempting to solo. Make the frigs/cruiser waves put points on the player ship...that way players wont be able to just cherry-pick the Dread and move onto the next site or specialize their fighters only for taking out a capital ship.
Finally Supercarriers: Just as with carriers, create a new anomally completely for them Example: Guristas Headquarters - solely restricted to Supercarriers. Guarded by 1 NPC titan spawn + periodic waves of elite frigates/cruisers and battleships. Same aggro rules as with the carrier site, but elite cruisers get to have the infinite point of HICs for obvious reasons. Now, before I get reprimanded -- yes, I am aware that atm an NPC Titan can be soloed by 1 dread and thus a supercarrier would eat it up immediately BUT the anomally titan does not need to have the same stats as the current NPC one that appears randomly nor should it have the same bounty. Numbers should be crunched and after careful thought and experimentation and player consultation, the anomaly titan spawn should have stats that --just as a current NPC dread does to carriers -- offers a challenge to a supercarrier. I would even include a tweaked doomsday, if it were up to me.
* * *
In the end, if implemented in a balanced way for both players and game economy, such a project would: -Offer players a satisfying experience depending on the ship class they prefer to use - To a very small extent, reduce the impact of AFK cruiser ratting.... - Make capital and supercapital pilots not feel like they are stepping on ants while ratting due to the complete lack of a challenge in Havens and Sanctums. - Increase the risk of capital ratting by having NPCs focus Carriers and Supercarriers with points and infinite scram, respectively. (Also, if anomalies are gated, a player cant warp to a prefered/safe distance from the site so that he can take out all point-equipped ships before they even get a chance to hold him.) - Allow CCP to more easily tweak only the problematic side of PVE if their current predicament surfaces again in the future, instead of all of it (like overall reduction in bounties) ...or in a way that affects PVP.
* Yes, this would mean them needing to put out some effort in terms of balancing or new anomaly design... And I'm sure that people will find some flaws with the above portrayed ideas. But its better than tearing down the whole nullsec pve and starting from the ground up... not to mention its much more realistic to achieve rather than a complete overhaul of PVE -- or not doing anything at all.
THINK CCP.... THINK! Give us something or ask the community if you are out of ideas but start FIXING your game properly! Until such a time, my accounts remain unsubed. :/
o7
While I have not sat down and looked at your solution and so forth, I am not opposed to this out of necessity, but and this is a big fat but, something must be done to slow done the growth of ISK right now. Waiting 2-3 months or longer won't cut it. So some sort of nerf is a near immediate requirement.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6649
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 17:46:25 -
[93] - Quote
CaZio wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:Reserved where is my f...g DISLIKE button?? i had just ordered a Rorq two weeks ago..... thanks for changes i do ratting in a Carrier as well but since there are so many other guys doing Sanctums - Heavens and F-hubs in Battleships AFK and blocking the Anos for carriers you should better nerf them instead going on our nerves. And regarding the money thing... may be you check out for yourself how much a PLEX was a couple of years ago...or just 1 year ago and how much it is now!!! so there IS some compensation CCP ...belive it or not... may be it should be a good idea to play your own game sometimes... When i started EvE in 2006 a plex was 300mil 3 weeks ago it was 1,2 BIL now after your glorious changes it is near to 1,4BIL ... Before we skilled DRONES to 5 to use them in Anos...after you nerfed Carriers most of the Skilltime was for nothing...did we get anything in return for the wasted time? yeah...another nerf... THX
Translation: Me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me, me,!!!
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6649
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 17:52:38 -
[94] - Quote
Kaze Mester wrote:Just delete anomalies from the game. And PI. And mining belts ofc. Oh..and don't forget about relic and data sites! Give players x ammount of isk every month to play with. Let us only buy ships with plex! Kill player owned markets on citadels.
I have planty more awesome CCP like ideas in my pocket! Pm me CCP! Or give me a call! Waiting! XOXO
That is some strong shiptoasting.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6650
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 18:00:32 -
[95] - Quote
Heleana Commodus Luyseyal wrote:CCP should keep on mind that if ppl skilled up for something and invested their real money into it, when they nerf bat that same thing to uselessness, they should refund skill points that are thrown by players. Or at least that is what other companies are doing, like for example blizzards hearthstone.
If the skills were rendered useless you might have a point. They aren't so you don't. The only thing you really have is that you are excessively butthurt and you think that justifies your petulance. Take all that ISK and be happy.
Or how about this:
CCP gives you the SP, but takes any and all ISK you made ratting?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6652
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 18:40:30 -
[96] - Quote
Axhind wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Heleana Commodus Luyseyal wrote:CCP should keep on mind that if ppl skilled up for something and invested their real money into it, when they nerf bat that same thing to uselessness, they should refund skill points that are thrown by players. Or at least that is what other companies are doing, like for example blizzards hearthstone. If the skills were rendered useless you might have a point. They aren't so you don't. The only thing you really have is that you are excessively butthurt and you think that justifies your petulance. Take all that ISK and be happy. Or how about this: CCP gives you the SP, but takes any and all ISK you made ratting? White knighting for CCP must be a new low for AMOK.
Wanting something for nothing is pathetic.
Ignoring the huge problem sitting in front of you is stupid.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6654
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 19:24:53 -
[97] - Quote
Valdr Auduin wrote:Feracitus wrote: The underlying problem is the infinite nature of the ISK currency. Limit the money supply by actually limiting the money supply. Transform ISK in a blockchain based cryptocurrency with a market cap and limited supply. They could just make NPCs start getting involved in the economy, we already have NPC miners now, why not NPC ratters that CCP can use to fluff the market by forcing the AI to set floors on the prices?
Why?
The way bitcoin works is not applicable to this game. Bitcoin creation is governed by an algorithm. With respect to ISK CCP wants players to play the game and produce ISK, but it can't be too much or too little. Too much and inflation can get out of hand. Too little and deflation can curb stomp the economy. Inflation has the potential for a positive feedback loop, and deflation a negative one. That is, this system may not be self-correcting. Most market activities are self-correcting in that once you start to incur losses it is just a matter of time before you have to stop. Profits will ensure people keep going and provide and incentive for people to get into that market and pursue innovation and invention. Money has always been a tricky thing in economies in that governments rarely can keep their damn hands off of it, thus often mucking it up more than stabilizing things.
Case in point, CCP revamped carriers and supers and turned them into ISK printers. Where a small number of players can create as much ISK as a much, much larger number of players.
And there have been other instances where governments have screwed up money and prices. The most recent example is Venezuela where hyperinflation and price controls have destroyed the economy and people are going hungry in a nation rich with natural resources.
To CCP's credit they see the problem: too much ISK coming into the economy. One can argue their suggested fix is good or bad, but that much ISK entering the economy cannot be allowed to continue. This isn't an issue with an ISK faucet it is an ISK fire hose.
consider this...the amount of new ISK created was around 64 trillion. The overall total amount of ISK is a bit over 1 quadrillion. The previous amounts of ISK entering the economy was around 9.5T ISK/month. So, at that rate to double the amount of ISK in game it would take 105 months or 8 years and 9 months. Last month 64 trillion ISK entered the economy. The amount of ISK in game would double in 1 year and 3.5 months. It took 67 months to add 620T ISK to the game. Now we'll do it in just under 10 months. With absolutely no negative consequences?
Now we'll add NPCs to the market...why? What is this going to accomplish?
Again: Just turn off the ISK fire host. That is the most simple and elegant solution. No need to dance around implementing silly ideas.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6661
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 20:23:33 -
[98] - Quote
Valdr Auduin wrote:Teckos, stop rambling and propose a solution that limits the printability of carriers without destroying their combat ability, that or demonstrate that even under a full nerf the combat ability isn't actually being harmed and the reduction is really necessary for PvP purposes as well, if you can't do either with any competence then I would strongly argue the issue is in how bounty payouts work and not how carriers function. I'm an invisible hand advocate so all of your economics flourishes don't really sway me at all, active interference in markets ruins everything they're supposed to do.
I already have. Train reading comprehension....Hell, inject the skill.
Possible solutions: no change at all the carriers/supers, but they can no longer enter any anomalies. Or they can enter the anomaly, but can't lock rats. Baltec had something like when a carrier warps in a capital rat warps in with no bounty. Thus, the ISK printing is slowed down. Some have suggested carrier/super only anomalies that can be balanced in terms of how much they inject into the economy.
In general I'd be happy with the following:
1. Code in ban on carriers and supers entering anomalies today (tomorrow is acceptable). 2. Look for a better longer term solution that preserves PvP capabilities but does not trash the economy. 3. Maybe remove the ban depending on the solution.
For 2 there are probably a wide number of solutions, some might be implemented together. I have even suggested that CCP listen to their players, not the butthurt raging ones, but the ones who can see the problem and trying to suggest helpful solutions.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6662
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 20:40:27 -
[99] - Quote
Axhind wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Axhind wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Heleana Commodus Luyseyal wrote:CCP should keep on mind that if ppl skilled up for something and invested their real money into it, when they nerf bat that same thing to uselessness, they should refund skill points that are thrown by players. Or at least that is what other companies are doing, like for example blizzards hearthstone. If the skills were rendered useless you might have a point. They aren't so you don't. The only thing you really have is that you are excessively butthurt and you think that justifies your petulance. Take all that ISK and be happy. Or how about this: CCP gives you the SP, but takes any and all ISK you made ratting? White knighting for CCP must be a new low for AMOK. Wanting something for nothing is pathetic. Ignoring the huge problem sitting in front of you is stupid. Issue is that they finally made PvE that can't be multiboxed and is somewhat engaging and are now killing it by nerfing fighters that already barely work in TiDi fights. Ticks are a bit high but if they land around 80 mil that will be perfectly fine and they can just lower bounties if you are using a capital as CONCORD feels it's less risk and thus pays less. That way bounties can be brought down without removing good PvE or completely murdering fighters in PvP. In any case CCP have not given us a single reason to back them up lately as most of the changes have been beyond terrible (audio change is still amazing level of stupid even for CCP) as has been their behaviour towards us, their customers. So please find someone else to white knight for.
Except that the ISK supply grew in month at a rate that is comparable to six months of ISK growth last year. Yeah, other than that...nothing.
And I have been opposed to simply nerfing the DPS of carriers. I think that is ham handed. I'd prefer a temporary ban on carriers/supers ratting (at least a month, the upside is we can see what happens to ISK growth, if it doesn't drop to a more reasonable number then there maybe other problems too) and look for an alternative solution that preserves the PvP capabilities and does not trash the economy. Maybe limit carriers to capital sanctums where the ISK payouts can be adjusted to keep things on a reasonable basis.
One of the points I raise routinely in balance discussions is do not nerf game play for those not causing a problem. If a player has a carrier, uses it for PvP and does not rat in it, then this nerf hits hard and rather unfairly. A more subtle solution is called for, IMO.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6663
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 23:48:38 -
[100] - Quote
addelee wrote:CCP made it super easy for anyone to jump in a carrier or super. The ability to inject SP and buy isk made this a reality. In the past, fly a carrier was a lot of training time and that too of supers (especially the isk). I'm relatively old as a character (my main is 04) and I couldn't afford a super. I now can as I SP farm and thus, gave me a lucrative source of isk.
What did they think would happen? People wouldn't take effective ships to go and rat in? If so, very naive.
I don't however disagree that something had to change. ISK facets aren't good but I think there still needs to be a risk vs reward element. Taking a rattlesnake out to rat can net you an easy 20 mill tick (normally more) and it's a tiny investment compared to a super.
What we don't need is CCP doing knee jerk reactions.
Please tell me how much money it would take to skill into a super, buy the super, and the modules.
Here I'll help. A 25 billion ISK super will cost close to $310. Exactly how many people do you think are plunking that down? Let alone the ISK to fly a super.
And on top of that, all injectors do is move the problem forward in time. If the issue is carriers and supers are efficient at farming ISK...then they'd be just as efficient in 3 years when people have skilled into them the old fashioned way and we'd have the problem then.
See you noticed it too:
Quote:People wouldn't take effective ships to go and rat in?
That appears to be the problem. Whether people get their via injectors or time.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6663
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 00:12:54 -
[101] - Quote
Valdr Auduin wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:addelee wrote:CCP made it super easy for anyone to jump in a carrier or super. The ability to inject SP and buy isk made this a reality. In the past, fly a carrier was a lot of training time and that too of supers (especially the isk). I'm relatively old as a character (my main is 04) and I couldn't afford a super. I now can as I SP farm and thus, gave me a lucrative source of isk.
What did they think would happen? People wouldn't take effective ships to go and rat in? If so, very naive.
I don't however disagree that something had to change. ISK facets aren't good but I think there still needs to be a risk vs reward element. Taking a rattlesnake out to rat can net you an easy 20 mill tick (normally more) and it's a tiny investment compared to a super.
What we don't need is CCP doing knee jerk reactions. Please tell me how much money it would take to skill into a super, buy the super, and the modules. Here I'll help. A 25 billion ISK super will cost close to $310. Exactly how many people do you think are plunking that down? Let alone the ISK to fly a super. And on top of that, all injectors do is move the problem forward in time. If the issue is carriers and supers are efficient at farming ISK...then they'd be just as efficient in 3 years when people have skilled into them the old fashioned way and we'd have the problem then. See you noticed it too: Quote:People wouldn't take effective ships to go and rat in? That appears to be the problem. Whether people get their via injectors or time. I've seen people drop thousands of dollars on cardboard and plastic, some will do it on a whim two or three times a year. Never underestimate how swiftly a fool and his money will be separated, look at me, I'm poor.
I don't doubt it. Some people have plenty of discretionary income....but how many (and I am not one of them, I've gotten my SP the old fashioned way)? And why all of a sudden now, this month? I just don't buy this as a THE problem. Seems to me the problem is an unbalanced ship and whether the person getting into one got there in 5 days by spending a bucket of RL ISK or having started the game 8 years ago is not really relevant.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6664
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 00:36:39 -
[102] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Mike Azariah wrote: Interesting.
So maybe if they had max ratting/ded sites per space region or constellation in a given day, the equivalent of belts being mined out? This would limit the isk flow rather than nerf ships. Is that what you meant?
m
The problem is this impacts everyone, and in fact hits the non supers/carriers harder than the supers, since the faster you do sites as a result the more of the proportion you get. It might slow down the total isk supply, but at the cost of hammering everyone else into the ground, and forcing a single alliance to sprawl all over Nullsec again. Maybe if we had sites that could be done co-operatively using the new large grid where shooting/hacking this tower over here impacts that structure 1000km away over there and everyone on grid (who isn't cloaked) shares the payouts along the way, but even then supers could split their squadrons to some extent, though the range would place them at greater risk of losing fighters to PvP.
Or in fleet to share rewards. That way you can not have to worry about a cloaked dingaling on grid hoping to get some free benefits.
But yes, using carriers and supers in cooperative anomalies might be interesting.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6664
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 04:22:28 -
[103] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Teckos Pech wrote: Or in fleet to share rewards. That way you can not have to worry about a cloaked dingaling on grid hoping to get some free benefits.
But yes, using carriers and supers in cooperative anomalies might be interesting.
I had the idea of simply on grid to allow two small fleets to meet in a site, but decide not to shoot each other, instead each take separate objectives to stay out of weapons range from the other. Co-operation & competition together that way, while if it's fleet only the only sensible response to an intruder is shoot instantly, if it's anyone on grid you get a bit more of an interesting dilemma. It's a lot more development work to create that sort of thing though, which means that as a right now solution, they needed to do something, and outright banning carriers/supers from anoms means those people effectively earn 0 with their ships or rather -100% income, rather than the -20% or so profit (assuming fighters are lost sometimes, so profit isn't perfectly aligned with DPS). So in terms of carrier ratting, the current nerf is about as nice as it can be while still doing something. If they gave something back in terms of fighter survivability alongside the volley reduction it might be nicer for PvP purposes, or something like that, but I don't know enough about new carriers & PvP to really comment on that balance overall.
Okay, spontaneous cooperation...interesting suggestion.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6668
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 19:45:01 -
[104] - Quote
Lord Heluene wrote:So CCP nerfed my missiles a while back and I swiitched to a carrier because of it, now I am being punished by CCP for making isk in the ship they pushed me into. How thoughtfull!! NOT
Nobody pushed you into anything, you looked at the game and made a choice.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6668
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 19:46:29 -
[105] - Quote
HandelsPharmi wrote:Mark Marconi wrote:So 46.5% of the bounties can be gained by 6.2% of the players. Keep in mind, that all miners and even gate camped who have shot a single rat are counted to the 100 % :)
Yes! This is such an amazingly bad point it should be noted in a quote for posterity.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6668
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 19:54:10 -
[106] - Quote
Atrinos wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Lord Heluene wrote:So CCP nerfed my missiles a while back and I swiitched to a carrier because of it, now I am being punished by CCP for making isk in the ship they pushed me into. How thoughtfull!! NOT
The self-importance of anyone who manages to rationalize necessary gameplay changes as, "I'm being punished!" is mind-boggling. Tell you what: Why don't you tell us what you think should happen instead? Here's the problem: There's WAY too much ISK flowing into the economy. This major overabundance is attributable to the ISK-generating capabilities of ratting supers and carriers. Provide a solution to this problem. Alternatively, present an argument in favor of allowing the entire game's economy to collapse in lieu of making you sad by correcting the problem. Failing that, just bugger off. 1. Eve is a Sandox Game. So why shouldn't they be allowed to make money in Caps and Supercaps? 2. There are much smarter ways to decrease the isk flow. For example a global tax for ratting bounties with 20%. So why just **** up shipclasses 3. Many ppl were ratting in supers for a long time. It never was a Problem cause there were only a few of them. Skill injectors were anounced and now much More ppl were ratting in Caps and supercaps. This Problem was selfmade by ccp...
1. Because ruining the economy will ruin the game for everyone. 2. Because the problem is not ratters in general, but a subset of ratters. Those guys are the one's bringing in a crap ton of ISK into the game. I have posted this before, but I doubt you'll read and educate yourself so I'll do it for you. Last month, May 2017 just to be clear here, the amount of ISK coming into the game for that SINGLE FECKING MONTH was as much as was created in the last 6 months of 2016. 3. Three points: a. Carriers and supers were changed by CCP. b. If a teeny tiny number of people rat in an OP ISK printer it won't have the same impact as 10 or 100 times as many. c. The ships are still unbalanced with or without injectors. Whether you have the problem now or year from now or 2 years from now, they were doomed to somehow be nerfed.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6669
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 20:01:01 -
[107] - Quote
Atrinos wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Atrinos wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Lord Heluene wrote:So CCP nerfed my missiles a while back and I swiitched to a carrier because of it, now I am being punished by CCP for making isk in the ship they pushed me into. How thoughtfull!! NOT
The self-importance of anyone who manages to rationalize necessary gameplay changes as, "I'm being punished!" is mind-boggling. Tell you what: Why don't you tell us what you think should happen instead? Here's the problem: There's WAY too much ISK flowing into the economy. This major overabundance is attributable to the ISK-generating capabilities of ratting supers and carriers. Provide a solution to this problem. Alternatively, present an argument in favor of allowing the entire game's economy to collapse in lieu of making you sad by correcting the problem. Failing that, just bugger off. 1. Eve is a Sandox Game. So why shouldn't they be allowed to make money in Caps and Supercaps? 2. There are much smarter ways to decrease the isk flow. For example a global tax for ratting bounties with 20%. So why just **** up shipclasses 3. Many ppl were ratting in supers for a long time. It never was a Problem cause there were only a few of them. Skill injectors were anounced and now much More ppl were ratting in Caps and supercaps. This Problem was selfmade by ccp... 1. Nobody said they shouldn't be allowed to make money in caps and supercaps. The assertion is that the amount of money being made in caps and supercaps is unsustainable, and needs to be brought into line. 2. A global tax on ratting bounties would impact all ratters, including those who aren't currently earning the massively outsized incomes of carriers and supercarriers. This fails to address the problem that was identified, impacting far more players. Why should a VNI ratter take a 20% hit to address the problem of the ISK-generating capabilities of carries and supercarriers being too high? Now, if you had said, "A 50% tax on bounties generated by Carriers and Supercarriers," then you may have been on to something. Pretty hacky kludge, but at least it targets the problem. 3. And your point here is... what? Even if we blame injectors, what is the actual point you imagine you're making? What part of this is actionable? What is your suggestion? Are they supposed to remove injectors from the game? Or are you trying to assert that since it's CCP's "fault" (All balance and gameplay problems are CCP's fault in this sense, btw. It's also their responsibility to correct those missteps) it should just be allowed to persist indefinitely? Given the above, you have utterly failed at the task of presenting a solution that addresses the problem. Please try again. 1. A VNI has ticks around 20 mil. A supercap has ticks around 100mil. So a global tax would primary Hit that clases. Ccp said that there is to much isk were genrated through ratting so this is a solution that target this Problem. 2. Ccp made the Skill injectors for New players so that they could catch up faster. Caps are the Kind of endcontent and with Skill injectors everyone had access to this. So why blame the ratters when they used rl money to get in these ships and then just nerf them. If there were no Skill injectors there would be much less Caps. As i said - there always were ppl who were ratting in Caps and this was never a thing.
OMG no.
1. First, CCP said that a single group of ratters were causing the problem, carriers and super pilots. Second, it is a flat tax so it is a solution that penalizes the small time ratter just as much as the big time ratter who is causing the problem. Hence the tax will have to high enough to wipe out the negative effects of a money supply growing too fast. So it might have to be as high as say 50%. A VNI getting ticks of 10 million while the super pilot is still getting 50% is not going to be seen as fair to a much, much larger segment of the ratting players....WHO ARE NOT CAUSING THE PROBLEM TO BEGIN WITH. Second what do you think everyone with an alt or main ratting in a VNI will start skilling for? A super. You are not solving the problem long term.
2. The is not injectors, the issue are two classes of unbalanced ships when it comes ratting.
Stop trying to shift the discussion away from the problem--too much ISK entering the economy.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6669
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 20:05:02 -
[108] - Quote
Objectless Hatred wrote:Mark Marconi wrote:Objectless Hatred wrote:But meh, the changes were halved, you lost... deal with it. Yeah after 100 pages of tears the likes of which hi-sec has never produced and why? So 46.5% of the bounties can be gained by 6.2% of the players. Apparently you weren't playing when Incarna was released. It was the reason "pay2win" aka skill injectors and such wasn't released for 5 years. You know, the time the player base shot a monument for a week and cried on the forums.. Mostly high sec players no less.
Yes because SP always determines who wins.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6669
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 20:18:06 -
[109] - Quote
Objectless Hatred wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Objectless Hatred wrote:Mark Marconi wrote:Objectless Hatred wrote:But meh, the changes were halved, you lost... deal with it. Yeah after 100 pages of tears the likes of which hi-sec has never produced and why? So 46.5% of the bounties can be gained by 6.2% of the players. Apparently you weren't playing when Incarna was released. It was the reason "pay2win" aka skill injectors and such wasn't released for 5 years. You know, the time the player base shot a monument for a week and cried on the forums.. Mostly high sec players no less. Yes because SP always determines who wins. No but the player base was pissed over a monocle but doesn't care about skill injection. So yeah...
So it wasn't pay to win, and were people pissed about the monocle or the possibility of things like gold ammo? I think people thought the monocle was stupidly over-priced, but it was that article about how to really grab money out of players by creating better ammo, mods, etc. de novo for cash.
And ironically, people are now using skill injectors to deflect from a clearly unbalanced element in the game. And that imbalance was created not by pay2win, but by CCP doing a revamp to carriers and supers.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6670
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 20:33:34 -
[110] - Quote
Objectless Hatred wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:
The player based was pissed over a monocle, a very unflattering leaked internal newsletter, an extremely underwhelming update for which all other updates had been put on hold, an unopenable door, a refusal to come out and say "no" to golden ammo implying that there were plans for golden ammo, a tone-deaf argument about designer pants, and the general hubris of the game management at the time.
There was a lot more going on there than "Monocles".
And isn't the current whining over more than carrier/super nerfs because of ratting? the nerfs, the rorq nerf, the ghost training crap, the mysterious stopping of all skill queues, the lag, socket closes, etc etc? I only mentioned monocles because people that were playing at the time would more readily remember that and then the rest of the issues would come to mind as well. I still have a copy of the Greed is Good pdf :P
Yes. However, both SurrenderMonkey and I have come out against this general nerf to carriers/supers. Nerfing a ship overall that can be used in both PvP and PvE because of a PvE problem is not good either. I don't know about SurrenderMonkey, but I'd prefer a temprorary ban on carriers and supers ratting so that a better solution can be found.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6670
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 20:37:31 -
[111] - Quote
Here we go a simple and elegant solution:
CCP imposes a ratting tax on supers and carriers of....100%.
You can rat in your carrier or your super, you just get nothing for it.
No other nerfs. All combat abilities are returned to where they were.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
|
|
|