open All Channels
seplocked Market Discussions
blankseplocked Massive Ultra VAMPIRE WTF ISK SINK (Am I the only seeing this?)
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic

Phoebe Halliwel
Posted - 2009.11.08 02:21:00 - [31]
 

VV I was looking for a coherent argument about how the changes will affect the markets overall, as opposed to references to 0.00 alliances as per comso (which are also of interest).

I understand pre the scarey blog people were speculating wildly on minerals, moon goo, supercaps and the like.

My point is simply; if the ISK faucets are due to literally evaporate (to a degree that wasnt previously anticipated, and perhaps isnt the end result as CCP will implement), how will that affect the markets. Even if it is toned down there must be some impact? I'm thinking things like t2 bpos and perhaps cap bpos to be more specific, although the rest all fall into the question if you consider it from a non-alliance point of view.

I suppose I'm asking "what will be the value of ISK going forward if these changes are even halfway implemented"?

Sorry if the question isn't clear; I can see various threads popping up but I can't see anyone answering the OP's question in this thread in a wider sense.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.11.08 08:48:00 - [32]
 

Originally by: Alice Rubidinous
Edited by: Alice Rubidinous on 07/11/2009 00:22:26
CCP just introduced a change, which within the barest of calculations (30 systems per region., 50 regions, 30 mil per day per system = 45 billion/day) creates a killer ISK sink.

How long will it be before self-destructing Rokhs is the most profitable profession in EVE?


Maintenance costs have changed to about 6 mil/day.

Linkage

So it is 9 billions/day, 1/5 of your projection.

At the same time, if people put up the upgrades, some isk faucet will be increased, even if less than the material faucets.

I see some deflation, but nothing terrible.


destinationunreachable
Hello Kitty Fanclub
Posted - 2009.11.08 10:00:00 - [33]
 

two comments:
1) I am not sure that the amount of ISK available actually increased. In the last quarterly economic newsletter CCP also mentioned, that the average wallet stayed (more or less) the same all the time.
What I can see (and every producer/trader should have noticed as well) is a massive deflation. As more and more people entered trading and production the margins become smaller and smaller. On most items (T1/T2) we are going towards a smaller than 10% margin. The falling trit price in the last weeks/months certainly didn't help as well.
Who doesn't know about deflation, its causes and effects should read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deflation - tldr: creating more ISK sinks is into the wrong direction

2) to understand the effects on alliance level of the upcoming massive ISK sink, we need to look at where the current ISK goes to.
Most corps have a subsidized sub-cap ship program and fully replaced cap program. Every corp tries to encourage people fighting for their space by investing its money into the gear.
CCP stated (did they or did the community read this in between the lines ?) that they wanted more small scale fights, this will certainly happen as corps will have much less ISK left to spend it on members ships.
This means that smaller ships as well as more T1 than T2 (insurance!) will be used as the individual member will need to pay more for his/her ships and be more careful and also more carebearing to make ISK.
If only we would know how much of the economy is being used up in 0.0 ...

Creepin
Posted - 2009.11.08 10:12:00 - [34]
 

Don't see any problem, massive isk sinks is what this game needs direly for a long time!
I'm sick & tired watching billions that I've made years ago that were able to buy me years of gametime back then reduced to crap that only able to provide me with months of gametime novadays.

Kazzzi
Amarr
Heathen Legion
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2009.11.08 11:19:00 - [35]
 

Less SOV, less jumpbridges, less quick access to enemy space. The larger coalitions aren't gonna wanna make 40 conventional jumps to get to their enemies, there's bound to be some standing resets and backstabbing in the name of convenient pewpew.

Ebanni
Ebanni Mercantile
Posted - 2009.11.08 11:44:00 - [36]
 

Originally by: Kazzzi
Less SOV, less jumpbridges, less quick access to enemy space. The larger coalitions aren't gonna wanna make 40 conventional jumps to get to their enemies, there's bound to be some standing resets and backstabbing in the name of convenient pewpew.


Exactly. And in some cases you'll find otherwise almost worthless systems fortified as "staging areas" for invasions, both to avoid boring everyone with 40 jumps to the enemy and to provide a nearby resupply/repair area to a warzone. Some Alliances will need to re-think their grand strategies, including their defensive deployments and supply lines.

Folks wanted more "realism" in how they conduct warfare in EvE... wish granted.

Twisted Evil

Mashie Saldana
Minmatar
Veto Corp
Posted - 2009.11.08 14:50:00 - [37]
 

Originally by: LaVista Vista
Maybe this will make up for the awfulness that is sleeper-tags and the, however small it is, ISK faucet it creates.

And how is that worse than normal NPC bounties?

Tagami Wasp
Caldari
Sarz'na Khumatari
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2009.11.08 22:00:00 - [38]
 

Originally by: Ebanni
Originally by: Kazzzi
Less SOV, less jumpbridges, less quick access to enemy space. The larger coalitions aren't gonna wanna make 40 conventional jumps to get to their enemies, there's bound to be some standing resets and backstabbing in the name of convenient pewpew.


Exactly. And in some cases you'll find otherwise almost worthless systems fortified as "staging areas" for invasions, both to avoid boring everyone with 40 jumps to the enemy and to provide a nearby resupply/repair area to a warzone. Some Alliances will need to re-think their grand strategies, including their defensive deployments and supply lines.

Folks wanted more "realism" in how they conduct warfare in EvE... wish granted.

Twisted Evil

And if CCP did think to do so, then they are doing something right at least.

Yarinor
Capital Construction Research
Pioneer Alliance
Posted - 2009.11.09 01:19:00 - [39]
 

Originally by: Ebanni
Originally by: Kazzzi
Less SOV, less jumpbridges, less quick access to enemy space. The larger coalitions aren't gonna wanna make 40 conventional jumps to get to their enemies, there's bound to be some standing resets and backstabbing in the name of convenient pewpew.


Exactly. And in some cases you'll find otherwise almost worthless systems fortified as "staging areas" for invasions, both to avoid boring everyone with 40 jumps to the enemy and to provide a nearby resupply/repair area to a warzone. Some Alliances will need to re-think their grand strategies, including their defensive deployments and supply lines.

Folks wanted more "realism" in how they conduct warfare in EvE... wish granted.

Twisted Evil


Confirming some backstabbing has already gone on in NC

Leana Darkrider
Minmatar
Creatio -ex- nihilo
The Donkey Rollers
Posted - 2009.11.09 09:01:00 - [40]
 

@ the OP,

If you're talking about Dominion, nothing big is going to be changed tbh.

At this moment you have to buy fuel for your towers which are claiming sov.
This is an isk sink too.

with Dominion, you don't need to pay for tower fuel, but instead you'll recieve bills for the systems where you're claiming sov.

These costs are roughly the same as tower fuel.

Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
Posted - 2009.11.09 09:22:00 - [41]
 

Originally by: Leana Darkrider
@ the OP,

If you're talking about Dominion, nothing big is going to be changed tbh.

At this moment you have to buy fuel for your towers which are claiming sov.
This is an isk sink too.

with Dominion, you don't need to pay for tower fuel, but instead you'll recieve bills for the systems where you're claiming sov.

These costs are roughly the same as tower fuel.


TBH I can understand the need for ISK sinks, but while the POS fuel made sense roleplay-wise, playing a rent for something you conquered with bloodshed it does not make sense at all.
What I could foresee is the first day a NPC clerk comes to rescue the fee, he's blobbed and podded never to be seen again. Or Concord sends ships and they meet a couple of titans and some dozens of dreads as welcome committee.

Leana Darkrider
Minmatar
Creatio -ex- nihilo
The Donkey Rollers
Posted - 2009.11.09 10:01:00 - [42]
 

Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Originally by: Leana Darkrider
@ the OP,

If you're talking about Dominion, nothing big is going to be changed tbh.

At this moment you have to buy fuel for your towers which are claiming sov.
This is an isk sink too.

with Dominion, you don't need to pay for tower fuel, but instead you'll recieve bills for the systems where you're claiming sov.

These costs are roughly the same as tower fuel.


TBH I can understand the need for ISK sinks, but while the POS fuel made sense roleplay-wise, playing a rent for something you conquered with bloodshed it does not make sense at all.
What I could foresee is the first day a NPC clerk comes to rescue the fee, he's blobbed and podded never to be seen again. Or Concord sends ships and they meet a couple of titans and some dozens of dreads as welcome committee.


You're right that it doesn't make sense.

but if you just look at the current game mechanics and the game mechanics that are comming with dominion, I think it's a huge improvement.

And with that, I don't mind how CCP is going to do it, aslong they can achieve their plans with nullsec Wink

Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
Posted - 2009.11.09 10:56:00 - [43]
 

I mind, instead.

This is still a RPG game, if people cannot achieve the suspension of disbelief ("because we all know that we needed an ISK sink" => RL mechanics become hideously immediately visible inside the virtual environment), the game has failed, and picked a wrong way instead of pouring in more effort and achieving the same while remaining in role.

Leana Darkrider
Minmatar
Creatio -ex- nihilo
The Donkey Rollers
Posted - 2009.11.09 11:06:00 - [44]
 

Officially EvE is a mmorpg, but if you look at the versatility EvE offers, alot of aspects aren't RPG. But just an online game.

But If you just look at the RPG aspects, I have to agree with you Wink


Sigurd Thorson
Posted - 2009.11.09 11:30:00 - [45]
 

Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha

What I could foresee is the first day a NPC clerk comes to rescue the fee, he's blobbed and podded never to be seen again. Or Concord sends ships and they meet a couple of titans and some dozens of dreads as welcome committee.


Well going with your roleplay reasoning the following day The NPCs running the gates in your system go on strike as their pay cheques have bounced and no-one has payed for the fuel to run them, meaning you are cut off no ships in none out. Comm channels go down for the same reason if you want sov of a system your corp/alliance pays for the services.

Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
Posted - 2009.11.09 11:58:00 - [46]
 

Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha on 09/11/2009 12:00:23
Originally by: Sigurd Thorson
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha

What I could foresee is the first day a NPC clerk comes to rescue the fee, he's blobbed and podded never to be seen again. Or Concord sends ships and they meet a couple of titans and some dozens of dreads as welcome committee.


Well going with your roleplay reasoning the following day The NPCs running the gates in your system go on strike as their pay cheques have bounced and no-one has payed for the fuel to run them, meaning you are cut off no ships in none out. Comm channels go down for the same reason if you want sov of a system your corp/alliance pays for the services.


No, going with my roleplay, the gate would simply to be fueled like a POS is. If it ends fuel, the gate becomes DED property (else it'd be exploitable to just deactivate it) and you have to buy it off them again for an hefty amount.

Gates would optionally be able to be upgraded - and this time paying a recurring fee for their "food" - with spawned NPCs that act like factional police (but confined to the gate) but under your SOV service.

Claire Voyant
Posted - 2009.11.09 13:12:00 - [47]
 

Originally by: Leana Darkrider
At this moment you have to buy fuel for your towers which are claiming sov.
This is an isk sink too.

You don't understand the concept of an isk sink. Buying POS fuel is not an isk sink because the isk goes to other players, namely the ice miners. An isk sink is something that removes isk from the game, like office rents, sales tax, station fees, etc. An isk source is something that puts isk into the game, such as bounties, mission rewards, and insurance.

With all due respect to VV's analysis (which I cannot follow for the life of me) I take a very simplistic approach, which is that isk sources will have to catch up with the new isk sink. That means more missions and bounties, but primarily I agree with the OP in thinking that most of the isk will be coming from insurance. Another way to look at it is that with a reduced demand for ice products, ice miners will switch to asteroids, keeping mineral prices low, and increasing the profits on insurance fraud.

Leana Darkrider
Minmatar
Creatio -ex- nihilo
The Donkey Rollers
Posted - 2009.11.09 13:17:00 - [48]
 

Originally by: Claire Voyant
Originally by: Leana Darkrider
At this moment you have to buy fuel for your towers which are claiming sov.
This is an isk sink too.

You don't understand the concept of an isk sink. Buying POS fuel is not an isk sink because the isk goes to other players, namely the ice miners. An isk sink is something that removes isk from the game, like office rents, sales tax, station fees, etc. An isk source is something that puts isk into the game, such as bounties, mission rewards, and insurance.

With all due respect to VV's analysis (which I cannot follow for the life of me) I take a very simplistic approach, which is that isk sources will have to catch up with the new isk sink. That means more missions and bounties, but primarily I agree with the OP in thinking that most of the isk will be coming from insurance. Another way to look at it is that with a reduced demand for ice products, ice miners will switch to asteroids, keeping mineral prices low, and increasing the profits on insurance fraud.


Maybe I wasn't clear enough.
As you know, towers also need other "fuel" then just the isotopes, ozone and heavy water.
I was talking about enriched uranium, robotics, mechanical parts etc etc.
These fuel sorts are an isk sink.

So, yes, I do understand the concept of an isk sink Wink

Andron Blaxcor
Posted - 2009.11.09 13:37:00 - [49]
 

The issue of isk sinks etc aside, this will have some interesting impacts on population in 0.0. Alliances will probably shrink so that each alliance supports fewer systems per member. This may lead to higher population densities and perhaps new hub systems in 0.0.

Secondly, what about faction-owned 0.0 space (i.e. prate space etc)? It seems that this may become more profitable as they won't have associated upkeep costs. It seems possible that wars will be fought over the use of such areas.

I am, of course, basing this on the assumption that holding sov will be more difficult/expensive. Paying for sov will result in less logistical challenges (compared to moving fuel around anyway) but wil cost slightly more. However, with fewer POSs around there will be less moon mining. This providing a (relatively) passive income that previously offset the cost of sovereignty, even if only to a small degree on poorer moons. So, on average, it seems holding sov will be more costly than under the previous system.

In addition, if the new isk sink removes isk from the system there will be less isk for allainces to accrue from the player market as total isk drops.

I also wonder if fewer towers will increase the price of any moon goo? Any POSs will now be primarily industrial rather than at the moment where industry is often secondary to sov.

However, there are so many competing factors pulling prices in different directions I admire anyone who totally and completely predicts the nature of the change to come as it's simply too complicated to understand more than a subset of factors. Some will make billions by speculation, some will lose billions. /me gets popcorn

SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
Posted - 2009.11.09 15:22:00 - [50]
 

Originally by: Mashie Saldana
Originally by: LaVista Vista
Maybe this will make up for the awfulness that is sleeper-tags and the, however small it is, ISK faucet it creates.

And how is that worse than normal NPC bounties?


Yes.... Yes there is... and Sleeper-Tags are it Shocked

A Class 3 Wormhole
Our corp lived out of a Wormhole for a while, three correctly fit Ravens (Yes just normal Ravens) where able to take on all the sites without losses. The sites are worth easily 100mil in Tags this was on-top of the salvage and "goods" you could pick up. And we were able to clear them pretty quickly, high speed Cepter going around salvaging and collecting tags after the encounter really helped.

I actually doubt there is a higher ISK fountain then Sleeper tags to be honest. ISK/Time Ratio is extremely high, even when you split it up in the fleet. The smallerst amount would be three, as we had difficulties with two, but three we had no issues. Any more then four actually created issues. Maybe 10 sites a WH clearing them in 20-30 minute lots, couple of hours per billion.

Dretzle Omega
Caldari
Global Economy Experts
Posted - 2009.11.09 15:39:00 - [51]
 

Edited by: Dretzle Omega on 09/11/2009 15:39:20
Originally by: SencneS
Originally by: Mashie Saldana
Originally by: LaVista Vista
Maybe this will make up for the awfulness that is sleeper-tags and the, however small it is, ISK faucet it creates.

And how is that worse than normal NPC bounties?


Yes.... Yes there is... and Sleeper-Tags are it Shocked

A Class 3 Wormhole
Our corp lived out of a Wormhole for a while, three correctly fit Ravens (Yes just normal Ravens) where able to take on all the sites without losses. The sites are worth easily 100mil in Tags this was on-top of the salvage and "goods" you could pick up. And we were able to clear them pretty quickly, high speed Cepter going around salvaging and collecting tags after the encounter really helped.

I actually doubt there is a higher ISK fountain then Sleeper tags to be honest. ISK/Time Ratio is extremely high, even when you split it up in the fleet. The smallerst amount would be three, as we had difficulties with two, but three we had no issues. Any more then four actually created issues. Maybe 10 sites a WH clearing them in 20-30 minute lots, couple of hours per billion.


But if you sell the sleeper tags to NPCs, there is exactly NO difference between the sleeper tags and NPC rat bounties (as far as ISK faucet goes), except that the tags require a bit more time sink to cash in.

The difference you are pointing out is that they are more valuable for the time put in. Consider them high bounty but somehow weaker NPC rats, in that case, and it is still the exact same thing. Again, only difference is time to collect them and possibility of not collecting or possibility of your ship (and tags) going boom before you get them to market.

SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:24:00 - [52]
 

Originally by: Dretzle Omega
Again, only difference is time to collect them and possibility of not collecting or possibility of your ship (and tags) going boom before you get them to market.


However, consider the fact that you only need to make 1 trip to the market per WH. The "volume" of the tags are minimal, you can have tens of thousands of them from hundreds of encounters. The only time sink is the time it takes when you choose to cash in the tags, the travel time to one of the many hundreds of "cash in" spots across EVE. The time sink per tag/bounty is smaller and smaller the more encounters you do.

Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:40:00 - [53]
 

Quote:

Secondly, what about faction-owned 0.0 space (i.e. prate space etc)? It seems that this may become more profitable as they won't have associated upkeep costs. It seems possible that wars will be fought over the use of such areas



There's also the 3rd choice, because NPC space has many drawbacks.

Only keep "sov" in the few crucial systems (supercaps, < -0.5 true sec, bottlenecks) and the rest is just "owned". That is, you try to enter and you are podded like today, but without a nice colored dot on the sov map.

I have a gut feeling that the current big alliances will do exactly this.


The newcomers, unlike CCP intentions, won't be able to pass the bottlenecks and will have to settle for the crappier systems, discover how L4 were not that bad compared to the new situation n
and eventually give up.

Moreover, an HUGELY massive factor CCP is mysteriously ignoring is that they cannot make "bears" move to 0.0 because for them:

if risk > 0 then hi sec L4 farm.

Period.


They did not consider that PvE "enthusiasts" are just another kind of player and not PvPers mentality ones.

Dretzle Omega
Caldari
Global Economy Experts
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:56:00 - [54]
 

Originally by: SencneS
Originally by: Dretzle Omega
Again, only difference is time to collect them and possibility of not collecting or possibility of your ship (and tags) going boom before you get them to market.


However, consider the fact that you only need to make 1 trip to the market per WH. The "volume" of the tags are minimal, you can have tens of thousands of them from hundreds of encounters. The only time sink is the time it takes when you choose to cash in the tags, the travel time to one of the many hundreds of "cash in" spots across EVE. The time sink per tag/bounty is smaller and smaller the more encounters you do.


Which only makes the point that there is little difference between sleeper tags and NPC rat bounties.

Claire Voyant
Posted - 2009.11.09 17:05:00 - [55]
 

Originally by: Dretzle Omega
Which only makes the point that there is little difference between sleeper tags and NPC rat bounties.

You guys have been arguing past each other, but we didn't say anything because it was entertaining.

Tycoon inc
Posted - 2009.11.11 16:18:00 - [56]
 

Can we please stop *****ing about lossing your billions upon billions of ISK please? Come on anyone with an ounce of intellegence can see that the Upgrade system and Density of the new system changes are made to off set the costs. Further more this just means that the Tax system will be more into use. With ever upgrade there will be more asteroid/Rats/plex sites and maybe moon minable's. They have not released the exact things that will change with the Upgrades specifically.

This right here is the age old thought process to the Old and "stable" world as we new it.

"CCP just introduced a change, which within the barest of calculations (30 systems per region., 50 regions, 30 mil per day per system = 45 billion/day) creates a killer ISK sink.

How long will it be before self-destructing Rokhs is the most profitable profession in EVE?"

The wheels keep turning and dont ever stop so get use to change. The new way is Smaller space, more Pew Pew, more Big ship battles, and more deversity among the Star Systems in EVE. This is why CCP is changing the Sov system to give more of the player base the option to extend out into 0.0

I can not see how this will create an ISK sink in the future if at all ever with the rent system, and the Upgrade system really depends on if they level the Rent rate per Upgrade. There are atleast 10-15 THOUSAND players in 0.0 at almost any given moment. Even at the 30m a day divided among 8 thousand people is only 6 Million per person, damn that 15 minutes a day you have to actually Rat or mine to keep your Awesome home!

In short..... Stop complaining damn.. Cool

skye orionis
Posted - 2009.11.11 18:37:00 - [57]
 

Look the bottom line is that when alliance fight it creates a demand for ships and therefore materials, right now ship prices are at an all time low due to a lack of conflict across new eden. The new sov system requires PVE activity to raise money to maintain sov, which means fewer pilots PVP'ing, and a reduced desire to take over space since more space = more PVE 'maintenance'.

Both these factors will reduce demand in markets further and make all those miners in hi-sec even poorer.

Cyntia Lelaert
Posted - 2009.11.12 04:10:00 - [58]
 

Your analysis is missing something.

And that's the answer to the question: Why? By this I mean, would the new system provide enough incentive for both combatants and non-combatants alike to put up with the ballache of 0.0 life? With the looming supercap nerfs not having sov may not be that big of a deal. A single alliance (or corp, really) with sov in a system not far from Jita could more than satisfy all the non-existent supercap needs of the whole server. The optimal solution may be to skip the upgrading ordeal and just get your pew on by ganking in empire.

On the other hand, if holding sov provides massive economic incentives (over and above light grinding missions in empire to fund roaming megablob pew) then the effect will be the opposite of ISK sink. It'll be a major ISK firehose.

Oh, and it's been about a month since self destructing Rokhs was the most profitable profession in Eve if you had enough prints and freighters.

Roemy Schneider
Vanishing Point.
Posted - 2009.11.12 11:10:00 - [59]
 

every non-npc outpost and every jump bridge system costs more than a PLEX.

soon we'll be able to enter GTcodes and credit card numbers right into out auto-pay function, just so the last bloke realizes what this is about.


Pages: 1 [2]

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only