DUST Search - Well, this is disturbing to say the least

CRNWLLC wrote:

Kristoff Atruin wrote:

rofljavascript:insertsmiley(' Smile

','/Images/Emoticons/ccp_smile.png')

>"BPOs do not create ISK in the GÇ£economyGÇ¥

They don't create isk directly, but they stop isk from leaving through the sinks. That means the net effect is the addition of isk to the economy. This isn't exactly advanced math here, it's just addition and subtraction. Across all players who have and use BPOs regularly the impact should be stunningly obvious.

Glad it was good for a laugh, chief, but it might be useful for you to frame the statement with its follow-up explanation. I've taken the liberty here:

CRNWLLC wrote:

This saved ISK is either hoarded (ie, not effecting the economy) or spent on advanced+ gear (because why would the player spend ISK on lame gear that he has an infinite supply of? And besides, isnGÇÖt this what the CCP economists wantGÇöplayers spending ISK?). Without BPOs, such a player might spend some ISK on lame (and super cheap in any case) standard gear in order to run fits GÇ£at a profitGÇ¥, but in my experience, itGÇÖs easier to make a pretty penny running adv+.

What you don't seem to understand is that hoarded ISK does not create ISK in the "economy" since it is hoarded--ie, it's out of circulation. Moreover, what you seem insistent on ignoring, is that there is no actual money circulation, which precludes any serious discussion of an "economy". Until ISK and items move between players, there's no worry of inflation or deflation or any of that other pseudo-intellectual crap. Every player currently (and in the foreseeable future) has the ability to make (in theory) tens of millions of ISK a week running starter fits, so this will continue to be a non-issue. Making a lot of ISK is also accomplished by not dying a lot, which I'll come back to again in a moment.

You mention that, cumulatively, the use of BPOs should be "stunningly obvious". And yet, it's not. The standard level gear that it's based on costs the same as it always has. This is true for all items in the marketplace--you don't see floating prices because there is no economy.

Now consider a proto-level player (SP invested into at least one proto suit and one proto-level weapon with max support skills) that doesn't die a lot and exclusively runs adv+. Not dying a lot, this player doesn't spend much ISK, period. They've got a boatload in their wallet, and they replace a few pieces of shiney on occasion, but by-and-large, they're hoarding cash. Does this player's lack of deaths (and associated lack of ISK spending/"leaving through the sinks") hurt the "economy"? You'd think (by extension of the argument that "free" gear, which doesn't need replacing and thereby also avoids ISK spending) this would be the case, and yet it somehow rings hollow. Care to enlighten me here?

You're right, though--it's not advanced math. It's not math at all. It has to do with logic and semantics.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Kristoff Atruin Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 1702	Posted - 2014.02.19 15:21:00 - [1] - Quote It makes sense to me, most of the time in pubs I'm running fits that use a lot of BPOs and cost 11,000 isk or less. I make around the same amount of isk from those matches as ones where I spend 50k per suit, which means I'm making around 150k more per pub match than if I didn't use BPOs. Say I run 10 matches in a night this way, and only play 25 days out of the month. That's an extra 37.5 million isk coming into the economy, from one person. If just 1500 people are doing what I'm doing, that's over 56 billion isk every month being injected into the economy. A lot of people play longer sessions than I do, so this is a conservative number. There are 245 districts in Molden Heath. Assuming each one is generating 7 million isk per day (after expenses, differing structures etc) that would be 51.5 billion isk per month. 56 > 52
Kristoff Atruin Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 1702	Posted - 2014.02.19 15:23:00 - [2] - Quote They could figure out how much was saved because they have a log of every death and what items were on the suit. Blueprint items are marked as such, so they just need to tally up the number of items lost and use the isk value of the equivalent item from the market.
Kristoff Atruin Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 1703	Posted - 2014.02.19 16:00:00 - [3] - Quote Everyone saying "there is no economy" is missing the point. The economy is there, we just can't influence it yet. When the influx of isk is completely out of whack with the outflows then that creates a big problem when trying to put the economy in our hands. It makes it like your average theme park mmo where there's massive inflation.
Kristoff Atruin Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 1704	Posted - 2014.02.19 16:27:00 - [4] - Quote Darken-Soul wrote: Kristoff Atruin wrote: Everyone saying "there is no economy" is missing the point. The economy is there, we just can't influence it yet. When the influx of isk is completely out of whack with the outflows then that creates a big problem when trying to put the economy in our hands. It makes it like your average theme park mmo where there's massive inflation. Explain this a bit more. The economy is the creation and destruction of isk. Isk is clearly being created and destroyed, and CCP studies this stuff. Their economist had a presentation at last year's fanfest about the Dust economy. Getting the creation and destruction of isk into balance is the biggest stumbling block to get over before the Dust economy can begin to merge with Eve. If the economy is creating far more isk than it is destroying and players get to start deciding the price of things, prices will skyrocket like we're in Weimar Germany.
Kristoff Atruin Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 1704	Posted - 2014.02.19 17:18:00 - [5] - Quote "The raw amounts of ISK floating around EVE and generated at such high quantities would offset so much point in DUST it would ruin the game for some" I've heard before that there's actually more isk in the Dust economy than in Eve, which isn't entirely implausible. The Eve economy is well balanced and has very controlled inflation. Most economic activity is moving isk around, not generating it out of thin air. Meanwhile in Dust the isk faucet has been running at full blast. At fanfest people were pretty shocked to see the amount of isk we had created here. There's really no reason why they couldn't merge the economies. They've said they'd start out with a large tax for transferring isk from Eve to Dust, which would prevent the ability to flood the Dust economy and ruin it. Over time they would slowly lower this tax. What that means is that prices in Dust will go up across the board as will our income. That means that we may be paying as much for a dropsuit as a frigate, which while it seems silly will work.
Kristoff Atruin Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 1707	Posted - 2014.02.19 19:23:00 - [6] - Quote rofl >"BPOs do not create ISK in the GÇ£economyGÇ¥ They don't create isk directly, but they stop isk from leaving through the sinks. That means the net effect is the addition of isk to the economy. This isn't exactly advanced math here, it's just addition and subtraction. Across all players who have and use BPOs regularly the impact should be stunningly obvious.
Kristoff Atruin Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 1707	Posted - 2014.02.20 18:19:00 - [7] - Quote CRNWLLC wrote: Kristoff Atruin wrote: rofljavascript:insertsmiley('','/Images/Emoticons/ccp_smile.png') >"BPOs do not create ISK in the GÇ£economyGÇ¥ They don't create isk directly, but they stop isk from leaving through the sinks. That means the net effect is the addition of isk to the economy. This isn't exactly advanced math here, it's just addition and subtraction. Across all players who have and use BPOs regularly the impact should be stunningly obvious. Glad it was good for a laugh, chief, but it might be useful for you to frame the statement with its follow-up explanation. I've taken the liberty here: CRNWLLC wrote: This saved ISK is either hoarded (ie, not effecting the economy) or spent on advanced+ gear (because why would the player spend ISK on lame gear that he has an infinite supply of? And besides, isnGÇÖt this what the CCP economists wantGÇöplayers spending ISK?). Without BPOs, such a player might spend some ISK on lame (and super cheap in any case) standard gear in order to run fits GÇ£at a profitGÇ¥, but in my experience, itGÇÖs easier to make a pretty penny running adv+. What you don't seem to understand is that hoarded ISK does not create ISK in the "economy" since it is hoarded--ie, it's out of circulation. Moreover, what you seem insistent on ignoring, is that there is no actual money circulation, which precludes any serious discussion of an "economy". Until ISK and items move between players, there's no worry of inflation or deflation or any of that other pseudo-intellectual crap. Every player currently (and in the foreseeable future) has the ability to make (in theory) tens of millions of ISK a week running starter fits, so this will continue to be a non-issue. Making a lot of ISK is also accomplished by not dying a lot, which I'll come back to again in a moment. You mention that, cumulatively, the use of BPOs should be "stunningly obvious". And yet, it's not. The standard level gear that it's based on costs the same as it always has. This is true for all items in the marketplace--you don't see floating prices because there is no economy. Now consider a proto-level player (SP invested into at least one proto suit and one proto-level weapon with max support skills) that doesn't die a lot and exclusively runs adv+. Not dying a lot, this player doesn't spend much ISK, period. They've got a boatload in their wallet, and they replace a few pieces of shiney on occasion, but by-and-large, they're hoarding cash. Does this player's lack of deaths (and associated lack of ISK spending/"leaving through the sinks") hurt the "economy"? You'd think (by extension of the argument that "free" gear, which doesn't need replacing and thereby also avoids ISK spending) this would be the case, and yet it somehow rings hollow. Care to enlighten me here? You're right, though--it's not advanced math. It's not math at all. It has to do with logic and semantics. I understand the concept of circulation and velocity quite well actually. What you seem to have trouble understanding is that they can't let us start circulating isk when the creation of new isk is completely out of control. The player market would take three steps forward and then fall flat on its face, because the inflation would be instantaneous. Their first goal is to get the creation and destruction of isk into balance to remove the risks.