What do you think would bring eve into a new golden age

[Elizabet_Forgrave]

@Altara_Zemara

I shake my head in disbelief at people who are just rude and insulting when I said nothing that was factually incorrect.

This is factually incorrect:

@Altara_Zemara

Nothing is actually ‘destroyed’ when a ship is blapped

[Mindahouf_Davaham]

exacpt some parts of it or there would be no need for miners

[Altara_Zemara]

@Elizabet_Forgrave

This is factually incorrect:

Nope. The purchaser paid ISK to someone else for the battlecruiser. The ISK still exist…in fact they bought another identical ship and were passed on again. There are no fewer battlecruisers in the game.

Without an ISK sink…those ISK can pass around indefinitely and there will never be fewer battlecruisers in the game.

[Elizabet_Forgrave]

Have you read my previous post? You keep talking about ISK, but ISK is not the only thing created or destroyed.

@Altara_Zemara

There are no fewer battlecruisers in the game.

What? Until someone produces a new battlecruiser, the destruction of a battlecruiser would mean there is one less battlecruiser in the game. You know the market is finite and player-seeded, right?

[Altara_Zemara]

@Elizabet_Forgrave

Have you read my previous post? You keep talking about ISK, but ISK is not the only thing created or destroyed.

I was originally responding to your statement about stuff being ‘removed from the economy’. Since when did the monthly economic reports list the number of battlecruisers in the game ?

[tutucox_Khamsi]

remove guided content
make NPCs irrelevant outside of PVE and stop making them do things that players should do
remove any reason to do fleets outside of PVE , SOV HOLDING and HUNTING PLAYER for loot , AKA NO FLEET FAKE PVP WITH REWARDS outside the meta game
make the market close to trading view again

[Altara_Zemara]

@Kezrai_Charzai

As is often the case, you’re confusing two separate issues here.

You’re talking about ISK, Elizabet is talking about economic production and resource consumption. The things you’ve been arguing about (Scarcity, destruction, production, “too much stuff”) are all part of the resource/production/consumption side of the economy.

ISK faucets and sinks are a different issue.

No they are not. The ISK faucets and sinks determine how much ISK there is in the first place to buy all that ‘stuff’. You’d pretty soon notice that if CCP put taxes at 99%.

What could be more relevant to the economy than how much ISK is in it to keep exchanging for stuff and back again ? The economic ( there’s a clue in the word there ) reports do not say how many Vexors or Drekavacs there are in the game, they state raw materials and ISK.

[Elizabet_Forgrave]

@Altara_Zemara

I was originally responding to your statement about stuff being ‘removed from the economy’.

Sure, but assets are part of the economy. I was talking about assets being removed from the economy through destruction, so when a ship is destroyed the hull, any module/cargo that doesn’t drop and any module/cargo that drops but decays in space is removed from the economy.

For some strange reason you then decided that because no ISK is lost to a sink, nothing is lost.

@Altara_Zemara

Since when did the monthly economic reports list the number of battlecruisers in the game ?

It doesn’t specifically list battlecruisers but the first graph of the MER is about asset creation and destruction as well as production. If you don’t think asset creation and destruction are part of the economy then I’m sorry but you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

@Altara_Zemara

What could be more relevant to the economy than how much ISK is in it to keep exchanging for stuff and back again ? The economic ( there’s a clue in the word there ) reports do not say how many Vexors or Drekavacs there are in the game, they state raw materials and ISK.

Not more important, but equally important is what you’ve described there as “stuff”, and that’s what I was talking about when you went off.

@Altara_Zemara

No they are not. The ISK faucets and sinks determine how much ISK there is in the first place to buy all that ‘stuff’. You’d pretty soon notice that if CCP put taxes at 99%.

What we’d probably notice is the rise of an alternate currency because ISK would no longer be fit for purpose. ISK being the currency still doesn’t make it the only source of destruction though.

[Altara_Zemara]

@Elizabet_Forgrave

For some strange reason you then decided that because no ISK is lost to a sink, nothing is lost.

Without taxes somewhere along the line, the money I use to buy my car could end up buying every single such car in the world. You don’t think that would have an effect on the economy ?

Sheesh…I’m simply pointing out that ISK sinks determine how much ISK is available for the economy, and how many times that ‘tax’ cycle can go round before value in Eve is genuinely ‘destroyed’. I didn’t expect the Spanish Inquisition.

[Elizabet_Forgrave]

@Altara_Zemara

Without taxes somewhere along the line, the money I use to buy my car could end up buying every single such car in the world. You don’t think that would have an effect on the economy ?

I don’t understand what relevance this has on the current topic, but no, if there were no taxes on transactions then it wouldn’t inherently matter if the same money were being used by successive consumers. Tax in real life doesn’t actually destroy money either, it’s just going to a central authority who then spends it.

@Altara_Zemara

Sheesh…I’m simply pointing out that ISK sinks determine how much ISK is available for the economy, and how many times that ‘tax’ cycle can go round before value in Eve is genuinely ‘destroyed’. I didn’t expect the Spanish Inquisition.

That’s because you are explaining something you don’t understand in response to a statement that has nothing at all to do with ISK. I was talking about asset consumption, effectively the opposite half of the economy to ISK, and you decided to claim that nothing is destroyed when a ship is destroyed then go off on a tangent about ISK and tax.

[Altara_Zemara]

@Elizabet_Forgrave

in response to a statement that has nothing at all to do with ISK.

Which was precisely why I brought ISK into it…because you left it out. There’d be no ‘asset consumption’ without ISK. There’d be no ‘size of the Eve economy’ without ISK. Every ‘asset’ is part of an endless chain that involves ISK. How the heck does ISK suddenly get to be irrelevant to the asset economy ?

Methinks you have reached Level V Hair Splitting and are now onto the Advanced skills.

[Kezrai_Charzai]

@Elizabet_Forgrave

I was talking about asset consumption, effectively the opposite half of the economy to ISK, and you decided to claim that nothing is destroyed when a ship is destroyed then go off on a tangent about ISK and tax.

This is the key issue. Many players, and often CCP themselves, forget there’s two separate economic cycles: one is the actual material goods cycle; resources, items, and their production, consumption and destruction.

The other is the “money supply” cycle, which is the creation, exchange and taxation of currency used to denote value for the trade of the resource cycle. People who can’t differentiate between the two are always going to construct flawed arguments about their ‘balance’.

You hit it earlier, Elizabet, when you said:

@Elizabet_Forgrave

It’s not really that people have accumulated so much stuff, it’s that the stuff isn’t being consumed.

The problem in EVE isn’t too much safety and too much production. On the ISK side, it isn’t really a problem with too much ISK even.

The real problem is EVE has too few reasons to engage in mass consumption/destruction. Since production moves ahead much faster than consumption, items will always accumulate until CCP makes production so ridiculously inconvenient that it virtually halts altogether. (As would almost all game activity, btw.)

ISK accumulation is an entirely different issue and will always accumulate until ISK sinks equal ISK faucets.

CCP thought that somehow putting the brakes on the economy would lead to more consumption/destruction - it did the opposite, as anyone with more than Economics 101 under their belt could predict.

Feeding production directly into vanity resource sinks (a la Everamarks) is the most ham-handed and awkward solution possible. Not surprising that CCP implemented it, in that case.

Without proper conflict drivers and conflict cycle balance, EVE will always have overproduction. Which is not ideal but is fine, frankly. People are more willing to risk cheap and readily available resources than they are rare and expensive resources, after all.

[Elizabet_Forgrave]

@Altara_Zemara

Which was precisely why I brought ISK into it…because you left it out.

It wasn’t “left out” it just has no bearing on asset loss.

@Altara_Zemara

There’d be no ‘asset consumption’ without ISK. There’d be no ‘size of the Eve economy’ without ISK.

Of course there would. There wouldn’t be a simple currency by which to measure the asset loss or size of the economy but the assets would still be lost. Like if you measure the value of minerals in the minutes they take to mine, you would be able to quantify the loss in number of minutes destroyed.

@Altara_Zemara

How the heck does ISK suddenly get to be irrelevant to the asset economy ?

It’s not suddenly irrelevant, it was never relevant to begin with. You said the economy relies on destruction. I added a miner addendum that it’s actually consumption because assets are used up as well as destroyed. You then declared that when a ship explodes nothing is lost. Here, I’ll quote you again:

@Altara_Zemara

Nothing is actually ‘destroyed’ when a ship is blapped.

This is completely false.

[Altara_Zemara]

@Kezrai_Charzai

ISK accumulation is an entirely different issue

I don’t know how you can say that, when all that accumulated ‘stuff’ is simply the conversion of ISK into material things. When someone mines ore and sells it, someone has to already have the ISK to buy it with. Every item sitting there in inventory in some dusty hanger is simply the conversion of ISK into ‘stuff’. ISK accumulation determines how much ‘stuff’ people can buy. As stuff is always interchangeable with ISK…stuff accumulation is ISK accumulation.

I can take all my ‘stuff’ and readily convert it into ISK again.

[Argel_OTF2]

Well if this kind of discussion doesn’t get the masses back…

[Io_Koval]

There’s been too many posts across too many threads, I can’t keep up.

[Argel_OTF2]

I think it can be distilled into:

1. More things to do, PVE or PVP - stimulate the demand for things with genuinely new activities, consider new game mechanics instead of nerfing/buffing.
2. Incentivise and/or organise the playerbase to fulfil the role of CONCORD and end the ganking debates.
3. Stop marketing the game as something it’s not, and luring people in to expect Elite/SC style gameplay
4. Make in-game lore more prominent and meaningful.
5. stimulate supply side (apart from the one loon who actually disagrees with this simple economic theory)

[ZhaoMin]

@Altara_Zemara

I can take all my ‘stuff’ and readily convert it into ISK again.

Yes you can, but you won’t get what you think you’ll get. Your arguments in the dozens of posts says your understanding of the economy revolves around the notion that an economy is solely dependent on the currency and value of goods and exchange rates are determined upon it, and as if currency value is fixed. But that’s exactly never was the case.

[Adm_Malkaviano]

In the past, CCP decided to buff turrets and debuff resistances in the same patch.

Ships in EVE are in a weird place where it’s better to go offense and numbers. Ofc they buffed other stuff along the way, like BS role bonus and stuff. EVE gets worse to PvE and fantasy roleplay by the day, one day it’ll be only about politics and logistics.

I dunno what to say, not everybody finds null sec entertaining, not everybody likes to sit in formation and cycle weapons, but CCP goes for the low hanging fruit, milking noobs and killing the game step by step, one day the amount of stupidity will break the immersion to the point people won’t login anymore.

Of course, this is my on brain fart. Lots of salt in there.

[Elizabet_Forgrave]

@Altara_Zemara

I don’t know how you can say that, when all that accumulated ‘stuff’ is simply the conversion of ISK into material things. When someone mines ore and sells it, someone has to already have the ISK to buy it with.

I’m genuinely not sure how you make the claim that " ‘stuff’ is simply the conversion of ISK into material things" then immediately go on to talk about someone mining, which is the creation of the ‘stuff’.

@Altara_Zemara

Every item sitting there in inventory in some dusty hanger is simply the conversion of ISK into ‘stuff’.

So if a miner mines ore and accumulates that in his hangar, what ISK did he convert into that ‘stuff’?