You misquoted/misunderstood.
Thats not a DMC quote, its from “JUSTIFIED ARROGANCE”, whom’s chosen name pretty much says it all.
Do not feed the trolls.
1 Like
Read the OPs post, there is at no point a request nor an implication that PLEX will drop in price because of his request.
This discussion is about relative sector level income streams: (Two examples)
-
The OP made 100mil / hr ten years ago and since bounty payouts have not changed in ten years he still makes 100mil / hr today but since the costs of good and services he used to buy with 100 mil now cost 300mil his income has dropped in real terms by 66%.
-
Another player was paid 100mil worth of LP / hour ten years ago but since LP values tend to rise with the economy he is making 300 mil per hour in LP now for the exact same number of LP he used to make. So for the LP player ten years ago he bought 100mil worth of goods and made 100mil per hour and today he buys 300mil worth of goods but makes 300mil / hour so for him his income is exactly the same.
The OP merely wants what is justly his to ask for that being, that by some means, his income is increased to 300mil / hour from ratting bounties up from 100mil / hour since the cost of goods has increased by a factor of 3 since he started ratting.
The solution is to tie ratting income to the EVE economy so when EVEs economy rises so will ratting payouts.
How this is achieved is up for debate and this is what the OP is basically saying, debate the how of keeping ratting income levels relevant not debate if there is a problem because there definitely is a problem.
Humbly Yours,
JUSTIFIED ARROGANCE.
1 Like
No, clearly it is not identical. But there is similarity so that theory of economics still holds. Just because it is a game does not change this. After all we use game theory to study the and understand the real world.
True. But the fact is we have never run out of coal…and probably never will. Instead we have found other sources of energy, IRL. We are much more constrained in game in some ways, but less so in others. But still we are making choices given constraints.
But even still we would not “run out” of gold though. We’d just has a finite amount. And over a given period of time we only have a finite amount of veldspar, not infinite. Sure there is more to be mined, but so that does not mean we have an infinite amount…unless we go and mine it with by using our time which is not infinite. What we have in game depends on our time. And our time is limited.
Yes they are. After all this is a game and it is supposed to be fun, not laborious like RL.
But now you are moving over to my side of the argument here. That the ideas found in economics can still be used, just not in the same exact way.
Consider that yes, indeed the money supply has doubled. Absent any economic production we should see a considerable increase in prices. But we haven’t. If anything items CCP considers “consumer” goods have, overall, declined in price. [Sure not every item has declined, but overall prices have declined] This fits with economic theory. And as the price of these goods go up (down) people can and do buy less (or more) much like what we see with a demand curve. It seems economics has explanatory power in game. Maybe not entire in the same way are RL, but still helpful.
Consider ISK…is it a fiat currency? I would argue no. I would argue it fits more with George Selgin’s idea of a synthetic commodity currency (although not exactly). To create ISK players trade their time for ISK, essentially. Since our time is limited the supply of new ISK is limited. CCP can influence this by how good they make ratting ships. We saw that with carriers/supers and the subsequent nerf to them.
Of course. I wouldn’t use an estimate for a RL “thing” in game. Hell, I would be highly skeptical of a RL estimate of anything relating to economics (for reasons unrelated to what we are discussing here). But our ultimate resource in game is our time, and since that is limited much of what we understand about economics still works in game…just not exactly the same as it would IRL.
Is there “a problem with inflation”? No. Does that mean there are no problems? No. I agree with the idea that PvE in game has been a long suffering aspect of the game. It is almost surely long over due for some love from CCP. I look at what the Goons are doing down in Delve and I wonder what CCP would do if other groups became as organized and focus on developing their space to the same degree.
Basically, when a problem is found…try and fix it. And don’t go around and “nerf all the things” to try and fix a specific problem. It is the reverse of what I have been falsely accused of here, IMO. I am not saying there are no problems because inflation is not rampant. At the same time, don’t make changes to address rampant inflation (which is not happening) to fix a specific problem.
I have never in my life given a goon so many likes. DAMN YOU TO HELL TECKOS!
3 Likes
I already discussed this with OP, as did others before me.
He since agrees, amicably, that raising income from those sources wont fix the issue he perceived as a problem, instead it would worsen it, especially in regards to PLEX.
OPs argument regarding caps being gated out of unrated sites/escalations, however, is still an extant issue.
If you want something to argue, I suggest the above.
1 Like
Lets assume that sectoral inflation is the topic and concern. I see no reason to accept this claim, but lets put that on ice. So its about sectoral inflation…so what?
In regards to the economy, CCP has always claimed to look at overall health. In order to accomplish that, they have to be (generally) sector agnostic. Thus, why CPI is an important metric to CCP. So, while OP may be seeing price increases relative to the things HE/SHE consumes, that does not mean that CCP cares/should care so long as there is not runaway increases generally speaking.
It seems to me that if you want CCP to make changes wrt your particular sectoral pain-points, you need to:
-
Explain why addressing your sectoral inflation should be preferenced regardless of everall economic health.
-
Convince CCP that aggregate statistics are not relevant in assessing overall economic health.
-
Provide a business argument for allocating dev time to make such changes.
The OP did not address any of these. Moreover, CCP’s bounty metrics and Dotlan’s NPC stats give prima facie evidence that (relative to, say, pre 2013) people have moved out of HS and into NS for ISK and mineral generation. At least part of the OP’s desires have been satisfied. SO why should CCP listen? Don’t get me wrong, I have no problem nerfing HS incursions, or putting barriers up to PVE with caps/SCs.
No, It just means NS entities, especially Goons in Delve, have finally clued into how valuable NS space is.
Its not an immigration issue, its a result of null bears going balls to wall to truly exploit what they have.
I agree that, for a long time, the productive capacity of null was understated. The buffs certainly increased the value of already fertile land. However, I think the whole “Farms and Fields” ethos/changes also played a significant role in Null use
But an increased use of null space does not explain the decline in use of HS space over time without immigration. Maybe you are right, and no migration occurred, but then (it seems) you have to rely upon further claims that either
- HS players left
or - HS players stayed in HS but stopped mining/ doing PVE activities that accrue large numbers of NPC deaths.
So what reasons do you have for beleiving 1) or 2)? Or is there another explaination?
1 is false. HS is, and has always been, far more populated than NS.
2 is false. There has not been a decrease in HS PvE or mining activity (ever) as far as I know.
To elaborate:
1 The HS population may suffer more attrition, but its also faster renewed. HS and NS populations are different.
2 All, and I mean all HS content is run by someone. Even the crappiest content is run.
So we do not have access to definitive evidence but, based upon what evidence is available, there is some reason to think HS NPC killing has declined. From Dotlan stats:
2011 (summary) Top NPC Kill systems
2017 (summary) Top NPC Kill systems
2 Likes
From Dotlan stats you will also find that 2017 total HS NPC kills were a little over 70% of 2011. THats a big drop in rat volume.
Or in other words: “Let them eat cake.”
It’s a good thing they don’t care about individual sectors of the game (or segments of their players), because if they did, they might definitely be concerned to note that all 10 of the top systems for NPC kills in null and at least 10 (probably more) of the top 20 systems total are Goonswarm space.
Tell us more about how you agree with the Goon. Goons are raking in more NPC bounties than the rest of the players in the game combined. Your response: WORKING AS INTENDED. I wonder if CCP agrees.
Server population is less than 2011.
1 Like
You have to add the caveat or it doesnt hold up.
And this was my entire point all along. That most metrics do not take such things into full account. And when arguing such metrics people tend to hold onto the worlds view of it rather than the gaming portion. One where CCP has full control and things are infinite simply because you need to have “fun” as you say.
Again I never negated its relevance just its correlation. You imply a more direct correlation in your arguments, one that doesnt exist fully in game as it does in real life, one that also justifies your position of argument.
Either take the full view or no view as a skewed biased view makes everyone out to be idiots in the end.
its the natural result of jump fatigue and citadels. The potential was always known, goons have always been able to count.
1 Like
We dont care that you dont care NEXT PERSON
2 Likes
Its a player driven market. Increases in prices paid for objects, leads to more people farming objects, leads to reductions in prices paid for objects. Where CCP sees the production structurally gatewayed, they often change production or consumption.
example : alphas are using all the meta 4 blasters. CCP allows alphas to use t2 - consumption will change, prices of meta blasters will drop.
example : goo prices increased too much, goo prices for some ubits way too high, CCP adds ubit to highsec moons - production will change, ubits values will fall.
1 Like
Only one of these two ideas can be true.
Nope.
2 Likes
Be mad about it all you want. Being mad does not appear to be a convincing argument. If it was, CCP would have changed thier focus a long time ago. Like I said in the part of the post you didnt quote… convince CCP its a poor call.
Delve has historically been one of the most lucrative regions. Its just seeing more use than in the past. If they are concerned, CCP is probably concerned about the productive capacity of Sov Null generally, with Delve being an exemplar. But I don’t know what they think. Nor, tbh, care.
1 Like