I really think this needs to be debated. Big catchphrase “Income inequality” and all we get to see is data about Nullsec only and with specific destinction between Sub-Caps and Super-Caps.
What is this data supposed to be good for?
Is CCPs plan for the future to have alpha accounts in Myrmidons earn the same amount of ISK a Super Carrier can make?
What i’d really like to see here is how much people multiboxing Highsec Incursions make compared to the Supercarrier.
Wormholes are also missing - I’ve heared 2bil per hour but with how many dreads is that?
Also you specifically don’t count accounts but “players” - how common is multiboxing in incursions and wormholes? What does the average “player” earn WHERE?
If we only look at data about Nullsec we can’t even start talking about income inequality.
Also don’t forget effort and risk - clearly living in more dangerous space should be more profitable.
I see lots of big numbers being thrown around these days. I remember when making 100m/hr was considered high. Now you can apparently make 700m/hr running lvl 4s / burner missions.
Agreed that they can’t just look at one type and region of earning mass ISK. However the MER’s do make it pretty clear that if you’re going to address ISK faucet issues, Null is one of your starting points.
This is one of the messier design issues CCP has to face, I think. Partly because it’s all over the place (Null farming, incursions, mission blitzing, WH anoms, FW farming); partly because it is distributed across multiple playstyles; partly because it involves regular players, multiboxers and bots.
It will also be tricky to differentiate between the various stages of “This activity is high earnings, but it looks like less that 5% of the player base are able to exploit it” down to “This activity is somewhat less high earnings but 30% of the player base could exploit it”.
Incremental adjustments in payouts for various rewards would probably be the least harmful approach, especially if they were up-front about it and announced they would be adjusting them in stages over the next 12 months or something. CCP seems to have a preference for leaping from one extreme to the other though, in order to inflict maximum collateral damage on their game.
WH arent typically counted for 2 reasons. A because the regions arent all connected like in null B because the sites dont constantly respawn. So while you can scream WHers make 2B ISK/h its for like 1 hour unlike null where you can grind forever, or at least until some bad guy pops up in local forcing you to dock.
I don’t think the ISK faucets are even the issue. The rewards should scale with how much a player is exposed to risk. CCP knows this and the blackout was an attempt to fix it which got rejected by the people who profit an absurd amount from this existing imbalance (how surprising!!).
The best thing they could have done is leave it in place and eat the short term losses for a healthier game and more profits in the long term. But it seems they are completely incapable of making sane decisions this days.
rofl … did you ever hear the word “sample” all this data are samples for the big pile of date the have/look in …
thts not the only stuff they have but it would have take some hours to get a overview on all that stuff so they took the stuff interessting for many players …
since when is multiboxing a problem or not allowed?
as long as you make everything manual without botting software multiboxing is not a problem (all omega accounts)
True enough. ISK faucets are as well balanced by controlling the sinks/costs as by dialing back the earnings. Blackout cut back bounties in Null mostly by making people too uncertain to go out and earn them. As you are saying here, balancing the risk against the reward immediately brought the ISK faucet under control.
If Blackout had been left in place, or modified to be a delayed local rather than removed, I’m not sure how long it would have taken the big Null groups to adjust, find a way to counter the uncertainty issue, and go right back to farming bounties. Perhaps they never would have, but I’m betting they would have come up with something in another month or two.
So agreed, balancing the risk would be the ‘EVE’ way to go about it. Although we would still have to figure out how to balance risk against incursions, mission blitzing, FW plexing, Abyssals, etc.
The reason that I referred mostly to stepwise dialing back the faucets payouts is because that seems to be the sort of change that CCP is focusing on lately - tweaking numbers rather than changing fundamentals.
The MER tells you nothing about how many people contributed to those numbers and i would hope this is not about income inequality between alliances but players
Well ■■■■ those bots but should multiboxing not also lead to a bigger wallet? It does for miners and Incursion pilots while Super ratters need a second character for the cyno. It wouldn’t be verry useful data to treat all accounts seperately but throwing everything in one bucket ignores the added cost for running multiple accounts.
People who farm for PLEX directly enable the players who don’t want to farm for ISK at all so is that “income” for the person who is multiboxing or the person selling PLEX?
Well players can choose where they want to live.
IMO there is nothing wrong with making big money in Wormholes despite drawbridging because it’s a lot of effort and the risk of being evicted.
Same for sov null - lots of effort and default target for roaming gangs.
Lowsec needs reworking annyways but should obviously still make more money than Highsec
And there is also the investment of Skillpoints and ISK to do the thing in the first place.
A Gila can make solid money in Abyss with a few weeks worth of skills and costs some 300mil - how does that compare to Boson ratting?
AFK Myrmidon needs attention once in 30 min - Super ratting feels more like 2000 kilcks per minute to stop fighters from exploding.
Ther are a LOT of things to take into considderation - i HOPE CCP doesn’t think the ultimate answer for income inequality is Communism?
Well firsat of all i really hope they have better data and much better methods of dissecting it than what was shown in that awful presentation.
Right now all they did is to make “income inequality” look like a propaganda catchphrase to keep shitting on Nullsec without showing any evidence for the existence of income inequality other than ‘expensive ship gets higher ticks than cheap ship’.
all that shows is where the isk is. It specifically excludes liquable assets such as modules, ammo, drones, raw materials, and plex. Guess where 98% of my net worth is?
This is accumulated wealth, not income, no distinction by playstyle or character age or number of accounts or anything that would make this data useful. All it shows is that EVEs wealth distribution is actually less extreme than in the real world.
Wasting pixels on graphs like this is silly.
You mean the real world where inequality is stagnating economies right… That real world?
Saying EVE has less inequality than real life is not a high bar to clear, nor is it a sign of good things.
So you’re saying the USSR had the superior economie because of equality? It didnt.
Again: This is accumulated wealth.
How would you expect that curve to look with new people coming in while others have been doing industry and playing the markets and ganking Jita and loaning ISK and and and for years?
And how is other people having money a problem for you?
The topic was “Income Inequality” in PVE and CCP failed to show any evidence this even exists.
My ratting Battleship does not undock for Bounties but for doing Escalations so even the data they did show in favour of the hypothesis was complete garbage.
No strawman, you’re just not making any sense.
What would you propose to stop this curve from looking like it does? Resetting all wallets periodically so noone can pull ahead?
