Isnt it finally time to NERF Incursions?

(Teckos Pech) #21

Okay so I looked at the July Economic Report. There is no evidence of the money supply growing rapidly since the nerf to carrier and super-carrier ratting. While there is some indication of inflation, it is not clear that it is at all linked to incursions and as a result of carrier/super-carrier ratting.

You should really, really not post on economics in EVE.

(Marek Kanenald) #22

The money supply is still growing rapidly. It is only the rate of growth that has stabilized.

The nerf was negligible and its intention was primarily as a pvp nerf.

Looking at the graphs it seems there is an overall activity drop due to the summer vacation.

(Nevyn Auscent) #23

Funny, I wasn’t aware -8 Trillion counted as rapid growth.

(Teckos Pech) #24

Based on what? In looking at the report the money supply has been, if anything shrinking for the last 2 months. As Nevyn noted in July is shrank by just under 8 trillion, and the month before it shrank by about 17 trillion. How do you call that growth?

(Lulu Lunette) #25

Totally agree. Where do the poops go? Compelling. :smile:

(Marek Kanenald) #26

My bad, I did not factor in the 43 trillion active Isk delta. But on second thought this should just be included like the sinks.

(Vortexo VonBrenner) #27

Our capacitors are powered by…“biosolids”.
#pooppower #lormasta

(Blade Darth) #28

6/10 troll post

but indeed 99.99% safe isk printing has to go.

this includes

  • carriers being able to rat while aligned and warp out in 1 server tick
  • incursions
  • insurance in current form (turns minerals into isk)

(CMDR-HerpyDerpy Hurishima) #29

I do agree with you, but i also think that if carriers couldn’t align while ratting we’d have an overwhelming pile of dead carriers

(Blade Darth) #30

Just disallow warping while sensor array is on and extend it’s duration to 90 seconds or something like that.

Atm they are safer than a ratting battleship (rattle baby-sits sentries with 0ms and takes 12 seconds to warp off). Even safer than a ratting cruiser because a 100mn vni takes 15-30 seconds to align depending if you remember to turn ab off.

(Marek Kanenald) #31

I do agree with you, but i also think that if carriers couldn’t align while ratting we’d have an overwhelming pile of dead carriers


(Nana Skalski) #32

Insurance for capital ships and other non-industrial hulls is ridiculous concept. Have you ever seen a battleship insurance payout in real life when at war with someone? Industrial ships? Yes, but only in high sec. Any other ships that are used as combat ships? No way. There is a reason they are not possible to insure in real world. Expensive as hell and are meant to be in a very dangerous situations, and insurance companies would never have enough money to cover the payout.

(Scipio Artelius) #33

Have you ever seen a battleship flown in space, by an immortal bathing in a liquid filled capsule?

Seems RL isn’t really all that relevant.

(Nana Skalski) #34

Insurance methodology is the same everywhere when its something taken seriously.

But of course game economies that are not treated like serious business dont have to adhere to some fundamental rules. Its more like “have fun until it lasts”.

I think economy in EVE should be taken more seriously.

(Scipio Artelius) #35

Well then show me a privately owned battleship that takes part in war. Then talk seriously all you like.

Our ships are not government assets, self insured through the public purse.

Seriously, trying to apply RL to a game just doesn’t work.

(Nana Skalski) #36

Game DEVs ignored insurance policies, how insurance is working, they strapped it to a game mechanics only to reimburse losses people will take in a war, even ignoring the fact that PvP without industry and PvE is a bad idea, and the connections are for players to make, not for CCP to reimburse anything. But if you talk private assets, you have to make the same assumptions as in real life, else the system would not work for insuring company and insured. Only that CCP is the insuring company and they can print ISK as they wish.

Its not serious treatment of course. Tell me, will anyone stop building capitals because they will not be reimbursed in the war? I think they will be built to have advantage and losing them will matter a lot more, so there will be more risk. :smirk:

EVE will be real again. \o/

(Teckos Pech) #37

Inurance in game is not really insurance, it is more of a subsidy to risk taking. Why would you want to increase the costs (in relative terms) to risk taking. Fundamental result of economics: increase the cost of something you get less of it. You want people taking fewer risky actions in game? Less PvP, less war targets, less of pretty much everything? Really?

(Nevyn Auscent) #38

When people regard self destructing a ship as easier than moving the ship, there is perhaps an argument that on the T1 capitals insurance is too good.
Also the principle of insurance was to ensure that you could get back on your feet after a major loss, which even half the isk currently from a capital loss would be enough to do.

However that’s an order of magnitude thing that is very tricky to balance, and probably isn’t worth changing just to catch a few tiny edge cases.

(Nana Skalski) #39

So maybe dont ever call it insurance, as its not really it? Call it subsidy or ship cost reimbursement in that case. ISK cost of a ship that is meant to be lost.
Or just call it space socialism.

(Intar Medris) #40

Remove Incursions from high sec period, and buff the payouts for low, and null sec incursions. Seriously people get out of high sec. Your only limiting your potential by staying there.