Scarcity = X

Scarcity = X
The problem as I understand;

The bonanza of “ye good old days” created a glut in resources BAD for the game. Because some “entities” in the game gained overwhelming power to disrupt the entire population, action needed to be taken before the bubble collapsed. In short, Mega alliances are OP.

CCP Games decided to reduce inflation by limiting resources, therefore, raising the stakes on EVERYONE on the game, including non-pvp gameplay. This breaks a delicate balance between the wolf and the sheep. This unbalance diminished the enjoyment of certain gameplay VITAL for the economy putting the markets under extreme stress. In short, scarcity is bad for the sheep.

With higher stakes come greater Risk aversion reducing the enjoyment of endgame gameplay, feeding a wave of general displeasure of

thoughts welcomed.

PS. I was fully baked writing this, pardon if it doesn’t make sense.

Calm down miner.


Correct, and not a very good one at that, but I do it to pvp. I just returned after winning eve a few years back wwbee I think, noticed a big difference… everyone is broke everywhere… lol

I’m doing great, and I love scarcity.


how so if you dont mind

“It’s an ill wind that blows nobody any good.”

I believe Aiko is not the only person to have done well out of this. But there are always people who find a way to prosper in what other folks call ‘bad times’.

Examples from RL abound.


very true
you think the markets will adjust?

just trying to make sense of the general displeasure online.

The “general displeasure” is manufactured, by noisy individuals who like to whine and complain. In any community, there is a minority who complains more loudly than the silent majority. Recent changes discourage and disincentive AFK gameplay and botting - those who benefit from this are upset.


Most of what people perceive to be “bad” about scarcity is purely in their minds and doesn’t have the kind of economic impact on them that they think. Most people are mathematically and financially-incompetent, and view something like a decrease in yields as a direct hit to their profits, because they don’t see the bigger economic picture, in which demand and prices rise alongside the decrease in supply. It’s kind of like if you offer someone 100 units of an item at 100 units of currency per unit or 200 units of another item at 40 units of currency per unit, and they always take the latter because they’re getting more units, hooray! Yes, people are actually like that.

In reality, scarcity is actually very beneficial for miners for example because over the long term, it will make mining as a profession control a bigger portion of the overall economy due to the new demand premium for minerals, because supply/demand relationships are not linear.


I want you to take this homework back and, over the weekend, approach it from the position that every point raised may be incorrect.


This is rich… Considering you and your high sec ganking filth were up here not long ago crying because CCP screwed your gameplay over and started banning people. Hypocrite much?

1 Like

I don’t know what you are talking about.

1 Like

Scarcity was good, but before Scarcity they should’ve introduced the Indy Changes first to ■■■■ with easy indy, then remove the resources.

She does have a good point.

The delicate balance was already broken though. Look at the changes that were made before and during the ‘glut’. Much of the danger in eve, in particular hi-sec, was taken out.

CCP had to choose to either put the danger back in (very unpopular) or curtail the rewards (also unpopular but not as much).


She also has an agenda, much like everyone else offering “advice” in this forum of tribalist rage queens.

Ramona is the only one with an objective post so far.

Mr Epeen :sunglasses:

I think we can safely assume everyone has an agenda in one way or the other. The question then is if the comment had value for its content.

1 Like

Whose post is even being discussed at this point? Because Ramona replied to the thread (i.e. the original post), and not to another specific reply.

You’r right in a way, but like someone mentioned before, change can be good for people that adapt.

I think we are talking about the general malaise in the game