Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Old Pervert
Perkone Caldari State
137
|
Posted - 2017.07.07 21:37:42 -
[1] - Quote
Simple Isk sink:
1 - Add NPC-sourced parts ("widgets" as it were) to all ship and module production 2 - Reduce the drop chance across the board when a ship explodes, to something like 33% if the current value is 50%.
More specifically, the widgets would not be individually expensive, and they would have a volume of .01m3. In the manner they do not impact shipping costs much, and their small cost means they are flexible.
Ships and modules will certainly increase by a related amount, as any industrialist will simply pass on their expenses. That's fine.
Consider the following: - According to the May MER, ratting accounted for 2.3 T isk
- Suppose the cost of a T1 frigate were to increase 50k isk for the hull and 25k isk for your average T2 fit. Roughly 80k frigates each month have their belly buttons turned from innies to outies
- Suppose the cost of a T1 cruiser were to increase by 1m isk for the hull (lets say about 30k for the fit as they have more slots than a frig). Roughly 42k cruisers get their magic smoke let out
- Suppose a T1 BC hull goes up by 2m isk. There are roughly 15k losses every month
- Suppose a T1 BS hull goes up by 15m isk. There are roughly 9k losses every month.
80k frigates * 75k isk = 6b isk
42k cruisers * 1,030,000 isk = ~43b isk
15k BC * 2,030,000 isk = ~30.5b isk
9k BS * 15m isk = 135b isk
T1 hulls alone (with T2 fittings) result in a monthly isk sink of almost 215 billion isk, roughly 10% of the ratting bounties paid out accoring to the MER.
Assuming the impact of T2 hulls is 50% of the impact of T1 hulls, that adds another ~100 billion isk sink every month.
Assuming the impact of T3 hulls is 50% of T2 hulls, that adds another 50b isk every month.
All told, with a bit of very rough abstraction, subcaps alone can account for a sink of roughly 16.6% of the current ratting bounty payout.
The impact to an individual player is quite small. I don't think any of the outlined costs are unreasonable.
While I agree that the isk faucet needs to be nerfed, soaking up the isk already in-game needs to happen too. |
Old Pervert
Perkone Caldari State
137
|
Posted - 2017.07.07 21:57:06 -
[2] - Quote
For that matter, if you don't want to increase the complexity of production, just add a manufacturing cost from Concord - a permit.
Installing the job uses the permit, which licenses the production of x number of ships/modules.
Given that lore-wise concord has their fingers in everything already, a fee from them is hardly unusual given that they even technically limit the hardware you're allowed to put in your ships (which is why theirs are so much more powerful). |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
3274
|
Posted - 2017.07.07 22:02:52 -
[3] - Quote
Old Pervert wrote: - According to the May MER, ratting accounted for 2.3 T isk
That's uh.. that's per day.
Bounties were close to 70T for the month.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Old Pervert
Perkone Caldari State
137
|
Posted - 2017.07.07 22:18:25 -
[4] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:Old Pervert wrote: - According to the May MER, ratting accounted for 2.3 T isk
That's uh.. that's per day.Bounties were close to 70T for the month.
Oh. I thought that was a fairly low number. Nevermind, I'ma just try and delete this OP lol. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |