EVE General Discussion

 
4 PagesFirst pagePrevious page234
 

Referring to 'not enough being destroyed'

First post
Author
#61 - 2017-04-25 19:57:34 UTC
Teros Hakomairos wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
I don't really see the need to keep arguing with this guy, we all know it's silly. But I admit, people like this are interesting, they come of a game that is known for certain things and hate it, but here they stay. It would be like if you hated Dragons but keep plaiyng a game called "Yepp, pretty much just Dragons Online".

The rest of us know how important PVP is even if we aren't personally PVP freaks, it gives the game danger and thus value. A game where you can't lose anything isn't a game, it's masturbation.


Well "the rest of you" is wrong and this is a fact.....
Nope, that's your opinion.

A fact is verifiable, your opinion is not.



In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

#62 - 2017-04-25 20:18:42 UTC
Teros Hakomairos wrote:
Well "the rest of you" is wrong and this is a fact.....


That's not what a fact is mate.

A fact is something where you can point to data or some other kind of hard evidence to back up your assertions and support your conclusions.

You seem to have come to a conclusion based on your own views of the game, looked around for tiny scraps of evidence to support it (the few other people complaining on the forums about similar issues), and ignored anything remotely contradictory to your views on the matter.

Wanna see a real slope in the player numbers? Make High Sec perfectly safe. The slope from that will look like a sheer cliff.
#63 - 2017-04-25 20:22:00 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Wanna see a real slope in the player numbers? Make High Sec perfectly safe. The slope from that will look like a sheer cliff.
It'd make the drop into the Challenger Deep look like a gentle slope.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

#64 - 2017-04-25 20:24:05 UTC
Teros Hakomairos wrote:
nice.....

No proof it does not work means -----> it will not work (in the world of PVP supporters).....and CCP let them believe they are right with this nonsense.....this has to stop......
Maybe CCP make themself believe this nonsense too because they don't want to change the "special thing about this game"....
But "this special thing about this game" is obsolete in 2017 because the players are leaving...THIS is called "proof"....
Someday even CCP will learn this simple fact...hopefully not too late....

A 180° turnaround to a no pvp high sec is needed or players continue to leave and soon there will be only alphas.....

bottom line....


Let me answer/explain the underlined bold for you, or try to...........

To not have PvP in highsec,
1.) You can not allow players to sell or buy things on the market.
2.) You can not allow players to mine the stuff they mine now, all rocks would have to become the stuff only NPC's would use/buy.
3.) You can not allow players to build stuff, as anything they build is used in market pvp, or once purchased by others to condone in PVP of some sort.
4.) You can not allow players to place/own any structures like PoCo's/Citadel's/Eginerring Complex's
5.) You can not allow players to loot or salvage anything that will enable PvP (markets, or what not)
6.) You will have to remove anoms, scannable or otherwise because the promote PvP at their very basic.
7.) You can allow players to receive ISK from missions, and even LP.....but all LP stores must also be removed from said non-PvP zone(s).

hmmm, not sure i could go on here, not much left......but that is and what must be done in EvE if you wish to make a particular place (ie Highsec) a PvP-free zone.

Because.........
1.) Marketing is PvP
2.) Mining is PvP
3.) Missioning is a gateway to PvP
4.) Exploration is PvP, well all the anoms is PvP
5.) Manufacturing is PvP
6.) PI is PvP
7.) well ****........the whole game is PvP........

You sir might as well as uninstall, you do not want to PvP so there is no place here for you i guess.
Unless of course your commentary is simply your way of Trolling, then i guess you are PvP'ing in a way.
Teros Hakomairos
#65 - 2017-04-26 09:33:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Teros Hakomairos
Max Deveron wrote:
Teros Hakomairos wrote:
nice.....

No proof it does not work means -----> it will not work (in the world of PVP supporters).....and CCP let them believe they are right with this nonsense.....this has to stop......
Maybe CCP make themself believe this nonsense too because they don't want to change the "special thing about this game"....
But "this special thing about this game" is obsolete in 2017 because the players are leaving...THIS is called "proof"....
Someday even CCP will learn this simple fact...hopefully not too late....

A 180° turnaround to a no pvp high sec is needed or players continue to leave and soon there will be only alphas.....

bottom line....


Let me answer/explain the underlined bold for you, or try to...........

To not have PvP in highsec,
1.) You can not allow players to sell or buy things on the market.
2.) You can not allow players to mine the stuff they mine now, all rocks would have to become the stuff only NPC's would use/buy.
3.) You can not allow players to build stuff, as anything they build is used in market pvp, or once purchased by others to condone in PVP of some sort.
4.) You can not allow players to place/own any structures like PoCo's/Citadel's/Eginerring Complex's
5.) You can not allow players to loot or salvage anything that will enable PvP (markets, or what not)
6.) You will have to remove anoms, scannable or otherwise because the promote PvP at their very basic.
7.) You can allow players to receive ISK from missions, and even LP.....but all LP stores must also be removed from said non-PvP zone(s).

hmmm, not sure i could go on here, not much left......but that is and what must be done in EvE if you wish to make a particular place (ie Highsec) a PvP-free zone.

Because.........
1.) Marketing is PvP
2.) Mining is PvP
3.) Missioning is a gateway to PvP
4.) Exploration is PvP, well all the anoms is PvP
5.) Manufacturing is PvP
6.) PI is PvP
7.) well ****........the whole game is PvP........

You sir might as well as uninstall, you do not want to PvP so there is no place here for you i guess.
Unless of course your commentary is simply your way of Trolling, then i guess you are PvP'ing in a way.



Ommm.... all is well

Ommm.... Eve is not loosing customers day by day and ccp is not willing to do what the leaving customers want them to do so they let them go.....

Ommm..... this is no problem because all is well.....

Ommm.... everyone that is argumenting against all this is a hater and shoould leave the game because ccp propaganda PROOFS they are wrong

Ommm..... CCP always tell us the truth because they are always right.....

OMMMM

OMMMM

OMMMM
#66 - 2017-04-26 09:37:57 UTC
Teros Hakomairos wrote:


OMMMM

OMMMM

OMMMM



Practicing your meditation techniques?
Teros Hakomairos
#67 - 2017-04-26 09:40:55 UTC
Max Deveron wrote:
Teros Hakomairos wrote:


OMMMM

OMMMM

OMMMM



Practicing your meditation techniques?


Not mine....this is how some people get their opinion about the reality of the game today.....

Explains a lot.....
#68 - 2017-04-26 09:45:52 UTC
hmmm, well question for you Teros?

How long have you been playing EvE?
I myself have been playing since 2010, and your 'not'-unique perspective on things does not ring any more true than it did back then.

(and yes, this obviously not my very first character but it has been my main for awhile now)
The Initiative.
#69 - 2017-04-26 19:43:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Antares Graffias
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Joseephus Rotineque wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
PvP may destroy about 1 trillion ISK per month, whereas lapsed accounts remove anything between 30 and 70 trillion ISK per month.


Do you have a source for this?


FAI, March 2017:

http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/MER/Mar_2017/0_produced.vs.destroyed.png

Produced: ~4.53 trillion ISK
Destroyed: ~1.10 trillion ISK

http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/MER/Mar_2017/0_produced.vs.destroyed.png

Active ISK delta: -5.1630 trillion ISK (this btw is the lowest ever)

Since March had a extremely low delta, let's look at February:

http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/MER/Feb_2017/9a_sinksfaucets.png

Active ISK delta: -35.5999 trillion ISK

Or January:

http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/MER/Jan_2017/9a_sinksfaucets.png

Active ISK delta: -60.7101 trillion ISK

Or before going F2P, say, October 2016:

http://content.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/70687/1/9a_sinksfaucets.png

Active ISK delta: -38.0956 trillion ISK

No matter when you look, there is A LOT more money lapsing out than the value of assets destroyed.

So the average asset in EVE is mined, manufactured, traded, stored and removed from economy when the account lapses/goes inactive. It only makes sense to assume that demand is driven by hoarders-quitters, not pewpewers. They want ship X, obtain it, never lose it, then they stop playing and ship X become invisible to EVE's ""production and destruction"" economy.


Your interpretation of those graphs is incorrect. The value destroyed line that's hovering around an average of 1T is *per day* not per month.

That means the value destroyed in March was around 40.3T. The total Active ISK delta for the game during that same time was 5.16T or roughly 1/8th of the ISK destroyed in the game.

The Active ISK delta in February was far larger, at over 35T, but the volume destroyed was still up around 38T, largely due to the shorter month than any real drop in destruction per day.


I've got a question. I was looking this ISK Sink & faucets chart: http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/MER/Mar_2017/9a_sinksfaucets.png

I understand the general mechanic for Active ISK Delta. But I really tried to understand the real application for it. For example, in the chart: 5.16T was deleted from the server, but why? If these 5.16T belongs to players who leave the game for....we say one month, that amount of money will come back to the server next month so it is not 'deleted' actually.

I mean, if those players wouldn't play for a month and their amount of ISK stays in the server, it won't go to anywhere neither should affect to the economy. Then why it should be deleted? Can anyone explain to me why is?
#70 - 2017-04-26 20:47:12 UTC
Antares Graffias wrote:
I've got a question. I was looking this ISK Sink & faucets chart: http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/MER/Mar_2017/9a_sinksfaucets.png

I understand the general mechanic for Active ISK Delta. But I really tried to understand the real application for it. For example, in the chart: 5.16T was deleted from the server, but why? If these 5.16T belongs to players who leave the game for....we say one month, that amount of money will come back to the server next month so it is not 'deleted' actually.

I mean, if those players wouldn't play for a month and their amount of ISK stays in the server, it won't go to anywhere neither should affect to the economy. Then why it should be deleted? Can anyone explain to me why is?


So, this would be a better question for the MER comments thread and CCP Quant but I'll take a stab at it. This is only my interpretation, does not say anything about CCP or their uses for that graph, ect.

So yes that ISK isn't being deleted, at least most of it. It's a snapshot of the economy and reflects nothing more than how much ISK is currently in circulation. The Active ISK Delta reflects how much ISK is removed or added from players coming back or leaving as well as bans and removal of assets through GM actions. For example if someone generates 12T ISK over the last six months and, for the sake of argument, just lets it sit in their wallet then even if CCP don't ban the character they will remove that ISK since it was obtained through an exploit.

It's noted down precisely because it can't affect the economy and it does serve as a functional sink for ISK and should be taken into account in CCP's calculations of sinks and faucets.

If you note that spike at the end of this graph CCP Quant responded in the MER thread for this month that that spike is actually due to a bunch of returning players, so apparently the latest patch brought a lot of people back into the game and they brought a combined 30T or so ISK with them.
#71 - 2017-04-26 22:46:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Nevyn Auscent
Cade Windstalker wrote:


If you note that spike at the end of this graph CCP Quant responded in the MER thread for this month that that spike is actually due to a bunch of returning players, so apparently the latest patch brought a lot of people back into the game and they brought a combined 30T or so ISK with them.

Except it isn't. If you read the data it's clear that the spike at the end isn't returning players. The spike from returning players was when alpha clones were introduced, then we get a drop from rich players leaving the game, and the march spike is because not much wealth left the game (-5T isk delta), and so the 66T bounties faucet finally is having a visible impact on the totak isk supply.
In march we had about a 2 to 1 ratio of isk created vs destroyed (Not quite that but close enough for illustrative purposes). And it's been close to that for a few months just people leaving the game kept it hidden.

@Indahmawar Fazmarai
PVP does not destroy isk, or not at anywhere near that rate. PVP destroys assets but MAKES isk due to insurance. The only cost is the manufacturing & market tax on making new items. Which if I can maths right, is less than the isk faucet for the percentage that is destroyed.
#72 - 2017-04-27 13:07:01 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:


If you note that spike at the end of this graph CCP Quant responded in the MER thread for this month that that spike is actually due to a bunch of returning players, so apparently the latest patch brought a lot of people back into the game and they brought a combined 30T or so ISK with them.

Except it isn't. If you read the data it's clear that the spike at the end isn't returning players. The spike from returning players was when alpha clones were introduced, then we get a drop from rich players leaving the game, and the march spike is because not much wealth left the game (-5T isk delta), and so the 66T bounties faucet finally is having a visible impact on the totak isk supply.
In march we had about a 2 to 1 ratio of isk created vs destroyed (Not quite that but close enough for illustrative purposes). And it's been close to that for a few months just people leaving the game kept it hidden.


I'm really quite certain that spike in the last 15 or so days of the graph is in fact returning players. I wasn't being facetious when I said "CCP Quant responded" he literally said that's what that is. The reason the ISK removed by players this past month seems to be low is because a bunch came back and became active.
#73 - 2017-04-27 13:14:19 UTC
Jita must die.

Make it an NS island.
#74 - 2017-04-27 14:02:34 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:

@Indahmawar Fazmarai
PVP does not destroy isk, or not at anywhere near that rate. PVP destroys assets but MAKES isk due to insurance. The only cost is the manufacturing & market tax on making new items. Which if I can maths right, is less than the isk faucet for the percentage that is destroyed.

Look again. As you progress beyond T1 frigates insurance moves from barely covering the hull to paying out only a fraction of the hull's cost.

Using the figures from http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/MER/Mar_2017/9a_sinksfaucets.png :

(in billions)
Cost of Insurance: 4,003
Manufacturing fees: 3,379
Repair Bill: 106
Copying: 104
Total sink: 7,592

Insurance paid out: 7,465

Which is 127B net sink.

But wait! If you factor in all or part of the Transaction Tax 10,671 sink... that's quite a sink indeed.
Pandemic Horde
#75 - 2017-04-27 14:05:52 UTC
Teros Hakomairos wrote:
nice.....

No proof it does not work means -----> it will not work (in the world of PVP supporters).....and CCP let them believe they are right with this nonsense.....this has to stop......
Maybe CCP make themself believe this nonsense too because they don't want to change the "special thing about this game"....
But "this special thing about this game" is obsolete in 2017 because the players are leaving...THIS is called "proof"....
Someday even CCP will learn this simple fact...hopefully not too late....

A 180° turnaround to a no pvp high sec is needed or players continue to leave and soon there will be only alphas.....

bottom line....


If there were a non pvp zone it would have to be nerfed to be very unprofitable compared to the rest of the game. That would keep in line with the risk vs reward philosophy CCP has. So think zones that offer missions that pay almost nothing, allow limited industry, and even a limited economy (no remote buy/sell). The asteroid fields would be tiny as well, and space would have no wormholes, and there would be no anomalies. It would suck basically!

I say this because this game is chock full of very smart people who would take advantage of a no pvp zone if it had some kind of advantage they could exploit.
#76 - 2017-04-27 14:55:58 UTC
Benje en Divalone wrote:
Nevyn Auscent wrote:

@Indahmawar Fazmarai
PVP does not destroy isk, or not at anywhere near that rate. PVP destroys assets but MAKES isk due to insurance. The only cost is the manufacturing & market tax on making new items. Which if I can maths right, is less than the isk faucet for the percentage that is destroyed.

Look again. As you progress beyond T1 frigates insurance moves from barely covering the hull to paying out only a fraction of the hull's cost.

Using the figures from http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/MER/Mar_2017/9a_sinksfaucets.png :

(in billions)
Cost of Insurance: 4,003
Manufacturing fees: 3,379
Repair Bill: 106
Copying: 104
Total sink: 7,592

Insurance paid out: 7,465

Which is 127B net sink.

But wait! If you factor in all or part of the Transaction Tax 10,671 sink... that's quite a sink indeed.


This is a *really* dubious conclusion verging on being incorrect just based on how far it's stretching the cause and effect chain from destruction. This applies to both you and Neville, production is tied to destruction but not directly, and not everything that's destroyed goes through the market when it's replaced. For example a large amount of Null losses are replaced by manufacturing these days, and the finished ships distributed through contracts for a very low fee relative to market tax.

So, first off, insurance is a net supplier of ISK no matter how you slice it. Your assertion that insurance only pays out well for a T1 Frigate is just incorrect. It varies by hull but most T1 ships pay out a substantial portion of the base cost of the hull in ISK, making the actual value lost to the player only in the modules and the initial cost of the insurance.

Also all ships receive a base amount of insurance for no ISK at all, and any of these destroyed ships generate a net payout from insurance as well.

You've also bundled a whole bunch of buckets into "things caused by PvP" when that's not really the case. BP copying isn't driven entirely or directly by PvP, neither is repairs, those are driven as much or more by PvE than PvP since these days with Citadels PvP repairs can be handled for free quickly and easily.

Same goes for manufacturing fees, a large amount of stuff is consumed in non-PvP activities or in things that aren't directly tied to PvP.

So yeah, this is just really dubious from top to bottom, starting with the assertion you were trying to refute.

Yes, PvP drives the Eve economy, but in any reasonable or measurable sense PvP is still a net ISK printer as far as sinks and faucets are concerned.
#77 - 2017-04-27 15:02:53 UTC
Blow up everyone and everything in Jita.

Jita must die.
4 PagesFirst pagePrevious page234
Forum Jump