Posted - 2011.04.04 16:07:00 - [61]

 

Originally by: Trin Javidan

---

How about fixing pvp so more stuff gets blown up? Combine this with a review of the T2 ME BPO needs and u can solve alot of problems at once. Solve the prom/dyspo/neo/thul/tech problem. Second make t2 recons/ hac's/ dicters/hic's/logi's (currently a avarage pvp ship cost 130 mil. Thats 130/ 40 = 3,25 hours or boring anomaly whoring) cheaper. Now people can buy more and care less about losing so more pvp = better isk sink (side effect; implants get lost more)

---

PVP ship destruction isn't an ISK sink. It does improve consumption (which is not an unalloyed good, but is basically positive) but it doesn't change the amount of money in the system.
Implant destruction leads to an increase the use of the LP stores, which is a small ISK sink, but I doubt increasing the number of poddings is a particularly effective way of sinking large amounts of isk from the system.
Dr. E. mentioned that plex creation currently outstrips usage by about 25%, which means either (a) plex prices will trend downwards until that's no longer the case or (b) there are significant stockpiles of plex in system.
Plex is a useful economic indicator, and it's also an interesting conduit for isk, but its effect on the overall economy is difficult to judge.

Posted - 2011.04.04 16:24:00 - [63]

 

Originally by: StuRyan

---

Edited by: StuRyan on 04/04/2011 16:15:34

Originally by: Marshallin Santerese

---

Originally by: Trin Javidan

---

How about fixing pvp so more stuff gets blown up? Combine this with a review of the T2 ME BPO needs and u can solve alot of problems at once. Solve the prom/dyspo/neo/thul/tech problem. Second make t2 recons/ hac's/ dicters/hic's/logi's (currently a avarage pvp ship cost 130 mil. Thats 130/ 40 = 3,25 hours or boring anomaly whoring) cheaper. Now people can buy more and care less about losing so more pvp = better isk sink (side effect; implants get lost more)

---

PVP ship destruction isn't an ISK sink. It does improve consumption (which is not an unalloyed good, but is basically positive) but it doesn't change the amount of money in the system.
Implant destruction leads to an increase the use of the LP stores, which is a small ISK sink, but I doubt increasing the number of poddings is a particularly effective way of sinking large amounts of isk from the system.
Dr. E. mentioned that plex creation currently outstrips usage by about 25%, which means either (a) plex prices will trend downwards until that's no longer the case or (b) there are significant stockpiles of plex in system.
Plex is a useful economic indicator, and it's also an interesting conduit for isk, but its effect on the overall economy is difficult to judge.

---

From what i have seen Plex Prices have gone up So that to me says people are trading them more than they are buying

---

If 25% more PLEX are created than used, that means folks are hoarding them; keeping stock ahead of perceived increases in PLEX value. If the price of PLEX continues to rise, then it will be harder for folks to play to pay for their account. However, the upside is that paying for PLEX will generate you more ISK. The smooth movement in price of PLEX either up or down in a sign of health. Sudden jumps, up or down, decreases confidence in the value of ISK/PLEX which will ultimate hurt the EVE economy. Whether prices are going up or down is irrelevant, what is important is that the movement in prices should be gradual.

Posted - 2011.04.04 16:29:00 - [65]

 

Originally by: Jack Gilligan

---

And so we see why CCP won't do anything about the botters/RMT. Sales of PLEX is shooting through the roof and they don't want to jeopardize all that extra revenue they need to develop those other two MMOs that aren't EVE.

---

On the other hand, botters/RMT cause CCP to lose potential revenue from those who would subscribe if they didn't perceive EVE as being a botter/RMT paradise.

Posted - 2011.04.04 16:32:00 - [67]

 

Originally by: Knug LiDi

---

If 25% more PLEX are created than used, that means folks are hoarding them; keeping stock ahead of perceived increases in PLEX value. If the price of PLEX continues to rise, then it will be harder for folks to play to pay for their account. However, the upside is that paying for PLEX will generate you more ISK. The smooth movement in price of PLEX either up or down in a sign of health. Sudden jumps, up or down, decreases confidence in the value of ISK/PLEX which will ultimate hurt the EVE economy. Whether prices are going up or down is irrelevant, what is important is that the movement in prices should be gradual.

---

Which happens soon as this ridiculous 0.0 nerf goes into effect Wednesday.

Clearly CCP wants to make it impossible for people who are not bots to pay for their own needs in ships, etc with what they can make in a few hours a week so that we end up buying PLEX. This will do nothing but encourage botting.

Posted - 2011.04.04 16:44:00 - [69]

 

Edited by: Jireel on 04/04/2011 16:45:32

Originally by: Marshallin Santerese

---

Originally by: Trin Javidan

---

How about fixing pvp so more stuff gets blown up? Combine this with a review of the T2 ME BPO needs and u can solve alot of problems at once. Solve the prom/dyspo/neo/thul/tech problem. Second make t2 recons/ hac's/ dicters/hic's/logi's (currently a avarage pvp ship cost 130 mil. Thats 130/ 40 = 3,25 hours or boring anomaly whoring) cheaper. Now people can buy more and care less about losing so more pvp = better isk sink (side effect; implants get lost more)

---

PVP ship destruction isn't an ISK sink. It does improve consumption (which is not an unalloyed good, but is basically positive) but it doesn't change the amount of money in the system.
Implant destruction leads to an increase the use of the LP stores, which is a small ISK sink, but I doubt increasing the number of poddings is a particularly effective way of sinking large amounts of isk from the system.
Dr. E. mentioned that plex creation currently outstrips usage by about 25%, which means either (a) plex prices will trend downwards until that's no longer the case or (b) there are significant stockpiles of plex in system.
Plex is a useful economic indicator, and it's also an interesting conduit for isk, but its effect on the overall economy is difficult to judge.

---

As an opposite, PVP actually INCREASES the amount of ISK in the system, as insurance payouts provide players with money in exchange of the minerals used to create them.

Posted - 2011.04.04 17:00:00 - [71]

 

Originally by: StuRyan

---

As more people can afford to play via ISK, when will they need to pay $17.50?

The model assumes there is a constant supply of new accounts that need to pay $17.50 becuase they don't have the Skill to make the ISK to pay for PLEX.

---

Every PLEX created, ever, represents an income to CCP of $17.50 from the moment it enters existence. The only way a PLEX is created (currently) is via redemption of a time code which is already paid for.

Again, people who pay their subscriptions via PLEX are not "paying with ISK"; they are paying another player for gametime and this second player in turn is paying CCP. At no point is anything truly "free" in this system. CCP long ago collected the real money represented by every PLEX in the game.

As such, there is a finite supply of PLEX, represented by those with real money who wish to exchange it for ISK via PLEX. There is no realistic scenario where the entire game is fueled by PLEX.

Posted - 2011.04.04 17:09:00 - [73]

 

Originally by: Knug LiDi

---

If 25% more PLEX are created than used, that means folks are hoarding them; keeping stock ahead of perceived increases in PLEX value. If the price of PLEX continues to rise, then it will be harder for folks to play to pay for their account. However, the upside is that paying for PLEX will generate you more ISK. The smooth movement in price of PLEX either up or down in a sign of health. Sudden jumps, up or down, decreases confidence in the value of ISK/PLEX which will ultimate hurt the EVE economy. Whether prices are going up or down is irrelevant, what is important is that the movement in prices should be gradual.

---

Maybe if we take a step back and look at this from another angle, the bickering might subside.

As has been established above, buying PLEX costs $17.50, whereas buying another 30 days of play time directly costs $15.00. Therefore, a rational player would not buy PLEX to cover their own subscription. It then follows that the only reason a rational player would buy a PLEX is to essentially turn real life money into ISK by selling that PLEX to other players.

The initial inherent value of a PLEX is determined by a comparison on the part of the buyer of real dollars to the ISK value of the PLEX on the current market. That buyer will immediately sell the PLEX on the market. The in-game purchaser of that PLEX is making a completely different value comparison, however. He is looking at the value of 30 days of play time versus the ISK cost of the item. No real money comparison is involved, which is why the perceived value of the item is different for these 2 players. That second player's valuation of ISK is determined largely by the ease of generating that ISK.

Now lets follow that chain backwards, starting with the nerf of a null-player's ability to generate ISK. If it's harder to generate ISK, it becomes more valuable. This makes an ISK for PLEX trade less appealing, which we'll translate into a lower demand for PLEX at the current in-game price point. Over time, this lower demand for PLEX (remember to draw a distinction between demand for PLEX in ISK terms on the market from demand for PLEX in real money terms from CCP) which causes the market to move to a new, lower ISK price for PLEX.

Now, if the value of a PLEX in ISK terms is now lower, then the value of PLEX compared to real money is lower. This decreases demand for PLEX from initial buyers. So, the argument that CCP is nerfing null because they're greedy is debunked.

Note, however, that the $2.50 difference between PLEX and subscription cost is not a profit for CCP, it's purely an offset for administrative costs. Frankly, CCP makes pretty much the same money no matter how you pay for your game time.

This isn't about PLEX at all. PLEX is just a really good way to look at the "exchange rate" between real money and ISK. The fact is, PLEX prices are rising because the value of ISK is decreasing, and that simply reflects the fact that too much ISK is being created in the game.

The null nerf is indeed meant to constrict the ISK faucet slightly. But there are lots of faucets and lots of ways to constrict them, so why this one? Well, I would suggest that CCP did their homework, and decided that this WOULD add more conflict to null, that it WOULD hurt botters more than the average account, that it WOULD be good for the game.

My point is, relax, they know what they're doing.

Posted - 2011.04.04 17:16:00 - [75]

 

Originally by: Rasz Lin

---

Originally by: StuRyan

---

Edited by: StuRyan on 04/04/2011 15:51:22

Originally by: Rikki Sals

---

@StuRyan
If "everyone" in the game was paying their subs by buying PLEX with isk, that would mean a small group of people would have to be paying CCP hundreds of thousands of dollars each month to generate enough PLEX to meet that demand.

CCP does not lose money from PLEX being traded.

---

If everyone who played via plex no plex would generated. and then it becomes an incredibly lucrative trade. My question is when someone buys time via real money where do the plex come from and are they given a price say the same as JITA prices?

---

Stop posting already, this is clearly beyond you.

---

Recess is that way ->

Posted - 2011.04.04 17:34:00 - [77]

 

WOW at the supercap numbers. Those things are really getting out of hand for each month.

Concern regarding isk sinks though, wouldn't decreasing the isk supply be better? Creating more sinks would probably make people grind more to get what they want which means that the end result is the same. Having isk recycle instead of some sort of "isk is created and then destroyed" sounds a lot more fun to be honest, and also "cooler"...

Posted - 2011.04.04 17:35:00 - [79]

 

Edited by: StuRyan on 04/04/2011 17:35:52

Originally by: Bagehi

---

Originally by: StuRyan

---

As more people can afford to play via ISK, when will they need to pay $17.50?

The model assumes there is a constant supply of new accounts that need to pay $17.50 becuase they don't have the Skill to make the ISK to pay for PLEX.

---

It has little to do with "skill" and a lot to do with efficiency of time. If you can make $17.50 in less time than it takes to make 350m isk (roughly the current price of PLEX), and you find grinding for isk to be roughly as fun as your job, then it is in your best interest to buy PLEX and sell it for isk. The higher the isk-based price for PLEX gets, the greater the percentage of the player population there will be who finds it more efficient to sell PLEX for isk.

---

The model assumes that someone is always going to be there to pay real money for game time which will generate the plex for someone to buy.

Posted - 2011.04.04 17:50:00 - [81]

 

Edited by: Mister Rocknrolla on 04/04/2011 17:50:53
LOL...

Originally by: QEN, page 44

---

On the other hand, the [Nanite Repair Paste] blueprint's second place position on the material efficiency [research] list is somewhat unfortunate. In all, 908 players did almost 1.3 million research runs on the blueprints. Every single run was wasted. <snip> ...all three ingredients in Nanite Repair Paste under the heading of Extra Material. Material efficiency has no effect on such extra materials.

---

I guess it's good practice.

Posted - 2011.04.04 18:21:00 - [83]

 

Originally by: Esan Vartesa

---

Originally by: Knug LiDi

---

If 25% more PLEX are created than used, that means folks are hoarding them; keeping stock ahead of perceived increases in PLEX value. If the price of PLEX continues to rise, then it will be harder for folks to play to pay for their account. However, the upside is that paying for PLEX will generate you more ISK. The smooth movement in price of PLEX either up or down in a sign of health. Sudden jumps, up or down, decreases confidence in the value of ISK/PLEX which will ultimate hurt the EVE economy. Whether prices are going up or down is irrelevant, what is important is that the movement in prices should be gradual.

---

Maybe if we take a step back and look at this from another angle, the bickering might subside.

As has been established above, buying PLEX costs $17.50, whereas buying another 30 days of play time directly costs $15.00. Therefore, a rational player would not buy PLEX to cover their own subscription. It then follows that the only reason a rational player would buy a PLEX is to essentially turn real life money into ISK by selling that PLEX to other players.

The initial inherent value of a PLEX is determined by a comparison on the part of the buyer of real dollars to the ISK value of the PLEX on the current market. That buyer will immediately sell the PLEX on the market. The in-game purchaser of that PLEX is making a completely different value comparison, however. He is looking at the value of 30 days of play time versus the ISK cost of the item. No real money comparison is involved, which is why the perceived value of the item is different for these 2 players. That second player's valuation of ISK is determined largely by the ease of generating that ISK.

Now lets follow that chain backwards, starting with the nerf of a null-player's ability to generate ISK. If it's harder to generate ISK, it becomes more valuable. This makes an ISK for PLEX trade less appealing, which we'll translate into a lower demand for PLEX at the current in-game price point. Over time, this lower demand for PLEX (remember to draw a distinction between demand for PLEX in ISK terms on the market from demand for PLEX in real money terms from CCP) which causes the market to move to a new, lower ISK price for PLEX.

Now, if the value of a PLEX in ISK terms is now lower, then the value of PLEX compared to real money is lower. This decreases demand for PLEX from initial buyers. So, the argument that CCP is nerfing null because they're greedy is debunked.

Note, however, that the $2.50 difference between PLEX and subscription cost is not a profit for CCP, it's purely an offset for administrative costs. Frankly, CCP makes pretty much the same money no matter how you pay for your game time.

This isn't about PLEX at all. PLEX is just a really good way to look at the "exchange rate" between real money and ISK. The fact is, PLEX prices are rising because the value of ISK is decreasing, and that simply reflects the fact that too much ISK is being created in the game.

The null nerf is indeed meant to constrict the ISK faucet slightly. But there are lots of faucets and lots of ways to constrict them, so why this one? Well, I would suggest that CCP did their homework, and decided that this WOULD add more conflict to null, that it WOULD hurt botters more than the average account, that it WOULD be good for the game.

My point is, relax, they know what they're doing.

---

This is a good post. Perfect explanation of why this change is good in the long run.

Posted - 2011.04.04 18:29:00 - [85]

 

Edited by: Bagehi on 04/04/2011 18:41:02
Edited by: Bagehi on 04/04/2011 18:37:17

Originally by: StuRyan

---

Originally by: Bagehi

---

Originally by: StuRyan

---

As more people can afford to play via ISK, when will they need to pay $17.50?

The model assumes there is a constant supply of new accounts that need to pay $17.50 becuase they don't have the Skill to make the ISK to pay for PLEX.

---

It has little to do with "skill" and a lot to do with efficiency of time. If you can make $17.50 in less time than it takes to make 350m isk (roughly the current price of PLEX), and you find grinding for isk to be roughly as fun as your job, then it is in your best interest to buy PLEX and sell it for isk. The higher the isk-based price for PLEX gets, the greater the percentage of the player population there will be who finds it more efficient to sell PLEX for isk.

---

The model assumes that someone is always going to be there to pay real money for game time which will generate the plex for someone to buy.

---

People are already willing to pay money for PLEX to convert to isk at the current 350m/PLEX exchange. Of course there will be people willing to pay if the exchange rate improves. The only situation where you could conceivably lose supply is if the Eve economy completely collapses (weakening value of isk dramatically). Increases in demand do not cause decreases in supply. It just doesn't work that way. This is some pretty basic economic theory.

Posted - 2011.04.04 18:44:00 - [87]

 

Originally by: Bagehi

---

Edited by: Bagehi on 04/04/2011 18:41:02
Edited by: Bagehi on 04/04/2011 18:37:17

Originally by: StuRyan

---

Originally by: Bagehi

---

Originally by: StuRyan

---

As more people can afford to play via ISK, when will they need to pay $17.50?

The model assumes there is a constant supply of new accounts that need to pay $17.50 becuase they don't have the Skill to make the ISK to pay for PLEX.

---

It has little to do with "skill" and a lot to do with efficiency of time. If you can make $17.50 in less time than it takes to make 350m isk (roughly the current price of PLEX), and you find grinding for isk to be roughly as fun as your job, then it is in your best interest to buy PLEX and sell it for isk. The higher the isk-based price for PLEX gets, the greater the percentage of the player population there will be who finds it more efficient to sell PLEX for isk.

---

The model assumes that someone is always going to be there to pay real money for game time which will generate the plex for someone to buy.

---

People are already willing to pay money for PLEX to convert to isk at the current 350m/PLEX exchange. Of course there will be people willing to pay if the exchange rate improves. The only situation where you could conceivably lose supply is if the Eve economy completely collapses (weakening value of isk dramatically). Increases in demand do not cause decreases in supply. It just doesn't work that way. This is some pretty basic economic theory.

---

Why would you want to pay real money for game time espeesially when 350m is a fairly easy thing to do.

Posted - 2011.04.04 18:56:00 - [89]

 

Edited by: Bagehi on 04/04/2011 18:56:29

Originally by: Doc J

---

Why would you want to pay real money for game time espeesially when 350m is a fairly easy thing to do.

---

Because, in the best of situations, it would take over an hour to make 350m isk (on average) and I can work for less than half the time to obtain the same income. Therefore, to be efficient about my time, I pay for PLEX to have isk in game. I rat only for sec status. I could sit and grind to make isk easily, but it is much easier and more efficient for me to spend that time working in RL.