EVE Search - The proposed 11% tax, official information and your views.

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

The proposed 11% tax, official information and your views.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Skex Relbore	Posted - 2009.10.20 18:14:00 - [31] Here's the suggestion for all the people who support the NPC corp tax. Instead of just saying that you think it's a good idea how about making an argument to show why it's a good idea or at least rebutt the arguments made by those who are arguing that it's a bad idea. Not one person on any of these threads I've read on this subject have been able to do that.
Baugoti Amarr THORN Syndicate Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.10.20 18:19:00 - [32] I look at it as the risk vs reward fact that EvE tries to be based on. There are a lot of areas in this game that have High reward with very little risk. NPC Missioning is a big part of it. This change adds a 'Little' risk to it. Ok so you wont be able to war dec NPC corps But it does a a choice for them to make. A. Stay in the NPC corp and run the 'risk' of losing missioning income B. Start/Join a PC corp and run the risk of getting war dec'd I am for the change, not because it will force people to leave the NPC corporation and join the PVP fun in the Universe, but for the fact that it slows the isk gaining going on. Just my input
Droog 1 Black Rise Inbreds	Posted - 2009.10.20 18:21:00 - [33] Edited by: Droog 1 on 20/10/2009 18:24:35 Originally by: Ukucia NPC corp chat: 300 players. PC corp chat: 5 players. If CCP wants to increase the 'social life' of players, they're doin' it wrong. CCP want you to be social in player corps not NPC corps. The idea that NPC corp members communicate and help each other is foreign to some of the Devs who seem to believe that NPC corps are currently inhabited solely by macroers and Isk sellers. (See CCP Prism Xs post in the original Dev Blog.) This change has got nothing to do with increasing player interaction and is just a way to suck Isk out of the economy.
Tippia Raddick Explorations Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2009.10.20 18:23:00 - [34] Originally by: Skex Relbore Not one person on any of these threads I've read on this subject have been able to do that. You should read more closely then. Arguments have been made and promptly ignored, forgotten, and swept under the rug. ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki
Skex Relbore	Posted - 2009.10.20 18:33:00 - [35] Originally by: Baugoti I look at it as the risk vs reward fact that EvE tries to be based on. There are a lot of areas in this game that have High reward with very little risk. NPC Missioning is a big part of it. This change adds a 'Little' risk to it. Ok so you wont be able to war dec NPC corps But it does a a choice for them to make. A. Stay in the NPC corp and run the 'risk' of losing missioning income B. Start/Join a PC corp and run the risk of getting war dec'd I am for the change, not because it will force people to leave the NPC corporation and join the PVP fun in the Universe, but for the fact that it slows the isk gaining going on. Just my input I think you need to go look up risk in the dictionary. A tax isn't a risk it's cost. A risk is a potential loss a cost is a garanteed loss. The mission runner already has a risk (the loss of their ship) whether they are in a NPC corp or a 1 man corp or a megacorp that's a part of huge aliance. That there is a low probability of loosing their ships doesn't change the fact that they are in many cases risking quite a lot it's just modified by the fact that their is a low probability of losing what they risk. The problem with idea of the NPC corp tax being a "wardec avoidance fee" is that wardecs are going to remain trivial to avoid along with the tax. Industialist/trader characters will still be able to avoid wardecs by remaining in the NPC corps since they won't be affected by the tax which only applies to mission runners (and only higher level mission runners at that). As I've argued here and elsewhere even if one assumes that the goal of pushing players out of NPC corporations is desirable (which is debatable IMO but we'll grant for the sake of argument) the NPC tax will not achieve the goal of pushing players into real NPC corps (as opposed to 1 man holding corps) If one assumes that the goal is to make players pay some sort of wardec avoidance tax it fails on that level as well by the fact that it only targets a subset of the NPC corp population (as pointed out above non-missionrunners won't be affected byt he proposed tax) and wardecs will remain trivially avoidable even by the mission runners through the use of holding corporations that can be left for the duration of any wardec.) Hell personally if my little 3 man corp gets decced by a greifer corp we can't handle I'll just have us take all our combat toons to RvB for a couple weeks of fun while the griefers waste their isk station camping our alts. Once again the problem is that even if one assumes that the professed goals are a desirable result (An argument I find debatable at best) the fact that the proposed action won't actually accomplish said goal renders the proposed action a bad idea.
Washell Olivaw	Posted - 2009.10.20 18:43:00 - [36] Originally by: Ukucia NPC corp chat: 300 players. PC corp chat: 5 players. If CCP wants to increase the 'social life' of players, they're doin' it wrong. Knowing that the devs are making changes that harm me and have no reasonable connection with their supposed goal discourages me from keeping accounts going long-term. Especially with the threat in the dev blog about further pain coming when this boneheaded decision doesn't accomplish what they want. I didn't know corp management skills stopped at a max of 5 players... [goes to check] Oh wait, they don't! Clue: join a bigger corp if corpchat is one of your priorities. Heck, join a big alliance for a chat channel with even more than 300 players. Bad for social life? Nah, you doing it wrong. Originally by: Signature Everybody has a photographic memory, some people just don't have film.
Vanzatoarea	Posted - 2009.10.20 18:51:00 - [37] Originally by: Nur Vadenn Greetings, I believe the new tax is more or less an extra crutch for player run organizations to help prop them up a bit. With a little searching you can find that there has been a long standing rumbling regarding player corporations and their ability to compete with an NPC corporation during the recruitment process. Many player corps charge at least 10% tax, but are very often unable or unwilling to divulge where exactly that cash is going. It becomes just one of the many points of contention when dealing with recruiting. In my opinion itÆs a bad idea not because it will cut deeply into profits, but because it sets a bad precedent. It says that CCP will use blatant manipulation to make NPC corporations better long before they will address the issues of trust, recruitment, and overall value associated with player corporations. Originally by: Washell Olivaw Why quote from devblog: Quote: So why this change? * It seems like an unrealistic scenario that the empires in EVE provide infrastructure, security and a host of other financially demanding services at no cost. I sometimes read people complaining about how EVEs physics are unrealistic, but on the realism scale, that still pales compared to a government that refuses to tax its citizens. * NPC corporations are meant to be temporary spaces where people can go about their daily activities while searching for a player corporation. Currently the level of comfort they provide, both in terms of war declaration immunity and 0% tax, give them an inherent advantage over player corporations which was never intended. Hopefully, this will let player corporations compete on equal footing with NPC corporations. * We would prefer that players join player corporations, or other entities that shape the world of EVE at a higher degree than the NPC corporations do, due to their impersonal and somewhat isolated role. That said, this change is not implemented to ôdestroyö NPC corps, they should be considered a small motivation to join a player corporation, where you can develop and flourish as a player. Based on this information from the DevBlog the only other question I have is when will player corporations living in high-sec empires start to get taxed as citizens of the governments? That would only be realistic and fair yes? the way corps are in eve they act more like independant nations rather the "citizens" of some NPC empire Thats why there can be wardecs and such between corps it`s normal like this , i mean , a good 0.0 NAP of alliance has (well rp wise anyway unless u can figure out how to explain godmode concord other then a crutch for imbeciles) many times the military might of any of the NPC empires
Baugoti Amarr THORN Syndicate Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.10.20 18:53:00 - [38] Originally by: Skex Relbore Originally by: Baugoti I look at it as the risk vs reward fact that EvE tries to be based on. There are a lot of areas in this game that have High reward with very little risk. NPC Missioning is a big part of it. This change adds a 'Little' risk to it. Ok so you wont be able to war dec NPC corps But it does a a choice for them to make. A. Stay in the NPC corp and run the 'risk' of losing missioning income B. Start/Join a PC corp and run the risk of getting war dec'd I am for the change, not because it will force people to leave the NPC corporation and join the PVP fun in the Universe, but for the fact that it slows the isk gaining going on. Just my input I think you need to go look up risk in the dictionary. A tax isn't a risk it's cost. A risk is a potential loss a cost is a garanteed loss. The mission runner already has a risk (the loss of their ship) whether they are in a NPC corp or a 1 man corp or a megacorp that's a part of huge aliance. That there is a low probability of loosing their ships doesn't change the fact that they are in many cases risking quite a lot it's just modified by the fact that their is a low probability of losing what they risk. The problem with idea of the NPC corp tax being a "wardec avoidance fee" is that wardecs are going to remain trivial to avoid along with the tax. Industialist/trader characters will still be able to avoid wardecs by remaining in the NPC corps since they won't be affected by the tax which only applies to mission runners (and only higher level mission runners at that). As I've argued here and elsewhere even if one assumes that the goal of pushing players out of NPC corporations is desirable (which is debatable IMO but we'll grant for the sake of argument) the NPC tax will not achieve the goal of pushing players into real NPC corps (as opposed to 1 man holding corps) If one assumes that the goal is to make players pay some sort of wardec avoidance tax it fails on that level as well by the fact that it only targets a subset of the NPC corp population (as pointed out above non-missionrunners won't be affected byt he proposed tax) and wardecs will remain trivially avoidable even by the mission runners through the use of holding corporations that can be left for the duration of any wardec.) Hell personally if my little 3 man corp gets decced by a greifer corp we can't handle I'll just have us take all our combat toons to RvB for a couple weeks of fun while the griefers waste their isk station camping our alts. Once again the problem is that even if one assumes that the professed goals are a desirable result (An argument I find debatable at best) the fact that the proposed action won't actually accomplish said goal renders the proposed action a bad idea. The term 'RISK' is in little quotes for a reason. As they are taking a 'RISK' in losing money to taxes by staying in an NPC. Nowhere did I say that it was a punishment for avoiding wars, all I stated was that it adds a choice for the player, to take an 11% hit on your taxes or have 0% tax in your own corp and risk a war dec. Oh and BTW.. if you are losing ships to Level 4 missions.. Your doing it wrong
Frug Veyr	Posted - 2009.10.20 18:59:00 - [39] Originally by: Skex Relbore OH GOD THE 10% IS DESTROYING EVE. IM NOT IN AN NPC CORP BUT U KNO ITS STILL HORRIBLE GODDAMMIT Mkay. Seriously, give up. It's a good change, makes sense, and is long overdue. It's not only about providing people with WT's, it's about giving player corps a selling point. "join us and you won't pay 10% tax on your missions" is a selling point. And you would know this if you had given this issue any thought at all. - - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Whisper/PrismX 4 emperor
Skex Relbore	Posted - 2009.10.20 19:03:00 - [40] Originally by: Baugoti The term 'RISK' is in little quotes for a reason. As they are taking a 'RISK' in losing money to taxes by staying in an NPC. Nowhere did I say that it was a punishment for avoiding wars, all I stated was that it adds a choice for the player, to take an 11% hit on your taxes or have 0% tax in your own corp and risk a war dec. Oh and BTW.. if you are losing ships to Level 4 missions.. Your doing it wrong I never said that the probability of ship loss was high just that in many cases the potential for loss is huge, this of course balanced out by the low probability of actually loss. That being said lag happens, RL sometimes happens and some people will do it wrong. Doesn't change the fact that it's not a risk it's a cost. Even though you say that it's a punishment for avoiding wardecs but that's a distiction without a difference. You're argument is still that the tax is in effect a fee for wardec immunity which is one of the main arguments I see people making in support of this tax. The problems I see are as I've stated several times above wardecs are still easily avoidable via the use of singleplayer holding corporations which can be dropped in the case of a wardec. Further others in NPC corporations will get the benifit of wardec immunity with out the "risk" as you put it of loosing income to the tax. Remember corporate taxes only apply to mission income and bounties in excess of 100k. Trading mining and production are not taxed in anyway so those characters get the benefits of wardec immunity at no cost. Now if corporate taxes were changed to affect all income streams then your argument would have some level of validity (a change I would happily support since it would make managing my corporation much easier) But as it stands today the idea remains chocked full of fail.
Nur Vadenn Amarr Viziam	Posted - 2009.10.20 19:04:00 - [41] Originally by: Vanzatoarea the way corps are in eve they act more like independant nations rather the "citizens" of some NPC empire Thats why there can be wardecs and such between corps it`s normal like this , i mean , a good 0.0 NAP of alliance has (well rp wise anyway unless u can figure out how to explain godmode concord other then a crutch for imbeciles) many times the military might of any of the NPC empires Hmmà care to cite your source regarding the military power of NPC empires as compared to player alliances? Last time I checked any entity in empire space is subject to the same protections accorded by Concord as NPC corporation members with the exception of war declaration. A PC corporation member receives Concord assistance if an unsanctioned attack is leveled against them just as an NPC corporation member would. Now a nominal fee buys one corporation a pass on hostilities toward another corporation for a week, but that is a service paid for. There is no good reason for PC corporations to be exempt from taxation unless they need that crutch. --- The Lurker
Mith Dahn	Posted - 2009.10.20 19:07:00 - [42] Fools, it's simply a very easy way to make you all argue and cry over what you think it's about; while what they really want to accomplish happens without you even knowing they did anything at all. When you do something right, people think you did nothing at all. I wonder what will happen to mineral prices when the high end mission runners are no longer 11% more profitable then a miner in a barge.
Tippia Raddick Explorations Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2009.10.20 19:11:00 - [43] Originally by: Mith Dahn I wonder what will happen to mineral prices when the high end mission runners are no longer ~~11%~~ 4% more profitable then a miner in a barge. Fixed, and: not a thing. ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki
Nur Vadenn Amarr Viziam	Posted - 2009.10.20 19:17:00 - [44] Originally by: Frug Mkay. Seriously, give up. It's a good change, makes sense, and is long overdue. It's not only about providing people with WT's, it's about giving player corps a selling point. "join us and you won't pay 10% tax on your missions" is a selling point. And you would know this if you had given this issue any thought at all. Actually most advocates of player corporations sung their praises without the tax in place. Based on posts all over this board and the NPE presentation you could conclude that player corporations are the best thing since sliced bread for everyone. Why do they need yet another selling point if they are so awesome? Besides a more accurate statement many corporations would have is ôjoin us and you will only have to pay 4% more in taxes on your missionsö or perhaps ôjoin us and you will only have to pay 10% tax on your missions. We save you a whole 1%ö. CCP could have chosen any number of better ways to approach the problems in PC corporations. Instead as they said in the DevBlog they went after this ôlow hanging fruitö. They are ignoring the shortcomings of player run corporations and instead adding another stick to poke us with without adding value to the alternatives. --- The Lurker
Vaal Erit Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2009.10.20 19:19:00 - [45] Originally by: Droog 1 Edited by: Droog 1 on 20/10/2009 18:24:35 Originally by: Ukucia NPC corp chat: 300 players. PC corp chat: 5 players. If CCP wants to increase the 'social life' of players, they're doin' it wrong. CCP want you to be social in player corps not NPC corps. The idea that NPC corp members communicate and help each other is foreign to some of the Devs who seem to believe that NPC corps are currently inhabited solely by macroers and Isk sellers. (See CCP Prism Xs post in the original Dev Blog.) This change has got nothing to do with increasing player interaction and is just a way to suck Isk out of the economy. I see more interaction and cooperative activities in a 5 man corp than in a 500+ man super NPC corp. NPC corp chat is a disgusting, unfriendly and unhelpful place for new players to be. Linking your faction fit Golem/CNR in state war academy chat because you thinks it makes you look cool is nowhere near being social. Most NPC corp members are mission runners who don't want to join a player corporation because they make more money in NPC corps and don't have to do anything else. Do NPC corps ever scout each other through dangerous space or help with recruitment, forums or teamspeak servers? Show me the daily roaming ops that a 500+ man NPC corp does, show me the cooperative ice mining ops to fuel corporation POSs or an OP to kill an enemy POS or defend a friendly POS. Show me the 500+ man NPC corp having their own T2 invention program, or ship replacement program. How about help with logistics and free jump freighter trips. No? 500+ man NPC corps don't do any of those things? You think helping some random person on a random mission that you can easily solo with 1/10th of a brain during which you don't have to say more than 5 words counts as a social experience? Please. Originally by: CCP Whisper So you're going to have to do some actual thinking with regards to hull components and their capabilities instead of copying some cookie-cutter setup. Cry some more.
Tippia Raddick Explorations Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2009.10.20 19:28:00 - [46] Originally by: Vaal Erit NPC corp chat is a disgusting, unfriendly and unhelpful place for new players to be. From my (long) time in SAK, I'd say that it varies… …on the other hand, while playing with a newbie char to do some tests on the start-of-life training bonuses, I picked up some real gems from the corp chat such as the old (thoroughly idiotic) "immediately train learning skills to 5/4" chestnut and a laughable claim that "thermodynamics has no purpose in PvP". (Can't choose which one fits best.) ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki
NeoTheo Heretic Army Heretic Nation	Posted - 2009.10.20 19:32:00 - [47] how about this, consider it a cost, for the service that the governments provide you for not being able to be wardeclared (unless you choose via factional warfare). as a npc corp player you dont live in the same world as the rest of us, you get relative safety; and no tax at the moment, you arent forced to work together. you have perks, tbh, if NPC corps actaully banded together and acted like a real corp , they'd be a decent fighting force. as it turns out they have pretty much zero costs and zero downsides. Heretic Nation
Scorpius Scar Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.10.20 19:46:00 - [48] noob blob vs. the swarm I wonder which would be bigger?
Nur Vadenn Amarr Viziam	Posted - 2009.10.20 19:48:00 - [49] Originally by: NeoTheo how about this, consider it a cost, for the service that the governments provide you for not being able to be wardeclared (unless you choose via factional warfare). Hey if Concord is charging NPC corporation members for protection then they should charge any individual in high security space for the services they render. Originally by: NeoTheo as a npc corp player you dont live in the same world as the rest of us, you get relative safety; and no tax at the moment, you arent forced to work together. Odd all of my ships appear to fly through the same oily space that I am sure yours and everyone elseÆs does. Weaponry and other modules work the same for and against me as everyone else. Oh and last time I checked you donÆt have to listen to that budding basement megalomaniac that has CEO next to his characterÆs name in your corporation either. No one forces you to work together with your corporation mates. At some point you decided you wanted to. Originally by: NeoTheo you have perks, tbh, if NPC corps actaully banded together and acted like a real corp , they'd be a decent fighting force. as it turns out they have pretty much zero costs and zero downsides. Hmmà another person not familiar with the restrictions placed on NPC corporations. I can assure you the grass is not as green here as you might believe. Consider also that CCP has chosen to restrict NPC corporations from using even the scant tools in game for organizing beyond creating fleets. Besides I have heard it repeated many times how awesome player corporations are. Are there not perks for you in your player corporation? --- The Lurker
Takseen	Posted - 2009.10.20 19:56:00 - [50] Ok, so CCP want more people joining player corporations, that's great. And here's my perspective as a new player, not even a month old. 1) One of Eve's selling points is supposedly that player scamming etc is "legal" ingame. You read about the big alliance backstabs in non-gaming press, and its emphasized by CCP and many players. A natural reaction of many new players is to not trust anyone in-game. This extends to joining player corps. 2) Early on you realise that grouping is rarely necessary, and is fact a disadvantage in some instances. Only 1 person gets the standing gains, which is very important for early missions. Plus there doesn't appear to be any easy mechanism for splitting loot. All of the mission content I've done so far has been quite soloable, and I'm told this continues up to level 4 missions, and extends to most non-pvp activities. So instead of gradually being introduced to grouping, and then joining a corp as a natural progression, they have to jump straight from solo play to a corp. 3) War decs have been mentioned already, and the threat of them is obviously going to decrease the amount of smaller corps in existence, that a newbie might be inclined to join if he's intimidated by the larger corps. New player paranoia is pretty hard to fix. Adding incentives for grouping would be nice, but quite complicated to implement. Some way for new corps to gain temporary war dec immunity would be great. Perhaps in exchange for a smaller tax, ostensibly paid to CONCORD for protection.
Tippia Raddick Explorations Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2009.10.20 20:21:00 - [51] Originally by: Takseen 2) Early on you realise that grouping is rarely necessary, and is fact a disadvantage in some instances. Only 1 person gets the standing gains, which is very important for early missions. Plus there doesn't appear to be any easy mechanism for splitting loot. All of the mission content I've done so far has been quite soloable, and I'm told this continues up to level 4 missions, and extends to most non-pvp activities. So instead of gradually being introduced to grouping, and then joining a corp as a natural progression, they have to jump straight from solo play to a corp. Weeeeeell… To begin with, the standing gains thing is, if not outright false, then very ill-phrased: you split standings gains towards corps. What you say describe faction standings gains from storyline missions, and you're actually better off without those early on… Also, the issues you describe with grouping are only relevant to running missions, which neatly demonstrates how missions are completely different from just about everything else in the game. They're not good teachers of what you need to know. You learn F1-F8 (which is only F1 these days), aaand… that's about it. That said, yes, teaching the vast benefits out grouping is not something EVE does well, but that's (yet another) fault in missions in general, and has very little to do with PC and NPC corps. ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki
Skex Relbore	Posted - 2009.10.20 20:27:00 - [52] Originally by: NeoTheo how about this, consider it a cost, for the service that the governments provide you for not being able to be wardeclared (unless you choose via factional warfare). as a npc corp player you dont live in the same world as the rest of us, you get relative safety; and no tax at the moment, you arent forced to work together. you have perks, tbh, if NPC corps actaully banded together and acted like a real corp , they'd be a decent fighting force. as it turns out they have pretty much zero costs and zero downsides. I've addressed this. Wardec immunity is still enjoyed by all the members of NPC corps yet the only ones who actually pay for that immunity are the high end mission runners and even they will pay quite a bit less than 11%. The industrialists, traders and miners in the NPC corps will still enjoy all the benefits of wardec immunity at no cost. Those high level mission runners who aren't willing to pay the 4% tax yet who still wish to avoid PC corps will simply make their own 1 man corps and continue to mission along quite happily most will never get wardecced simply due to being one little corps in the middle of a field of thousands of other little one man corps. The tax isn't the problem. The rate at this point is trivial and doesn't even apply to most people in NPC corporations nor does it apply to the majority of the income of those who will be affected. The problem is the concept it represents in addition to the stated intention of the devs to increase the level of pain until their desired results are met. The problem is with the CCP tring to tell people how to play in the sandbox, It's a fundamental shift in philosphy from the idea of players choice. Players telling each other "you're doing it wrong" is one thing. The players doing it wrong can always those telling them that and go about their business. The developers telling them "you're doing it wrong" often results in people saying "fine I'll go do something else in another game or in RL" The NPC corp tax fails on every level. It fails in concept it fails in application and it will fail to accomplish it's stated goal. Worse it opens the door for further actions that could potentially do real damage to the game. I mean its all fine and dandy to ask "can I haz your stuff" but every person who cancels their subscription is 15 bucks less going to CCP to buy the developers hookers and beers to keep them at their desks coding improvements. Itt's $15 less that can be spent on new hardware or bigger faster circuits. As I've stated before I'm in a PC so I won't be directly affect by this tax and yes the 11% that will effectly be only around 4% only a small subset of the players in NPC corps is a trivial amount. But that doesn't make it a good idea. Further the fact that it won't accomplish any positive outcome particularly the one that it is purported to be aimed at accomplishing. Just because an idea doesn't cause a catastrophic failure does not make it a good idea.
Oriens Pars	Posted - 2009.10.20 20:43:00 - [53] seriously... did we really need ANOTHER friggin topic about this?!? 11% is nothing. I think everyone will at least agree on that. BUT, when CCP decides that isn't enough and raises it to 50% or more, THEN it will be a problem. 11% NOT an issue
Baugoti Amarr THORN Syndicate Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.10.20 20:44:00 - [54] Originally by: Skex Relbore Edited by: Skex Relbore on 20/10/2009 19:11:55 Doesn't change the fact that it's not a risk it's a cost. Even though you say that it's a punishment for avoiding wardecs but that's a distiction without a difference. You're argument is still that the tax is in effect a fee for wardec immunity which is one of the main arguments I see people making in support of this tax. Cost - 1. the total spent for goods or services including money and time and labor 2. be priced at; "These shoes cost $100" 3. monetary value: the property of having material worth (often indicated by the amount of money something would bring if sold); "the fluctuating monetary value of gold and silver"; "he puts a high price on his services"; "he couldn't calculate the cost of the collection" As your are not making a purchase or selling a good cost is not in there.. Maybe your are thinking of the income rate, or maybe the 'require to lose' "this change cost mission runners valuable income" <-- which is a definition of cost Risk- expose to a chance of loss or damage; "We risk our income by staying in the NPC corporation" Now dont get me wrong.. I understand the argument made on how it is a punishment for being immune to war decs, And I do agree that mining/trading should be taxed (realism argument), however I look at this more of a chance (or force) for those who choose not to experience what most of the rest of us do, the what is the best way for me to do what I am good at. Currently: PVP - What and when to fight.. and where Mining - Where to mine (safest vs profitablity), what to mine and how to profit off of it Trading - if in an NPC corp, needs fixed Now I am not saying that this change will actually effect it that way, but that is what my hopes are.. and it does hurt the isk farmers a bit... but salvage is greater income anyway.
Takseen	Posted - 2009.10.20 20:57:00 - [55] Originally by: TippiaWeeeeeellà To begin with, the standing gains thing is, if not outright false, then very ill-phrased: you split standings gains towards corps. What you say describe faction standings gains from storyline missions, and you're actually better off without those early onà Also, the issues you describe with grouping are only relevant to running missions, which neatly demonstrates how missions are completely different from just about everything else in the game. They're not good teachers of what you need to know. You learn F1-F8 (which is only F1 these days), aaandà that's about it. That said, yes, teaching the vast benefits out grouping is not something EVE does well, but that's (yet another) fault in missions in general, and has very little to do with PC and NPC corps.[/quote Ah sorry, I was misinformed regarding standings. Grouping issues do extend beyond missions though. If I want to set up a temporary mining/hauling arrangement, there doesn't seem to be any way to prevent being ripped off. Nor is there a way to split the collateral/reward on courier contracts. Belt rats seem to be so weak that there's no need to group for them either. Plexes might be an exception, I've not tried any yet. PvP obviously works much better in groups, but its also expensive and difficult to get into for new players, although Red v Blue should help loads there. I guess my point is that joining a PC corp requires a certain leap of faith, that the benefits of grouping outweigh the risk of being war dec'ed/scammed/griefed etc. More incentives to grouping would increase the incentive to take the leap.
SomebodyKickedMyDog	Posted - 2009.10.20 21:02:00 - [56] what should i have for dinner?
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.10.20 21:02:00 - [57] Originally by: Skex Relbore Originally by: NeoTheo how about this, consider it a cost, for the service that the governments provide you for not being able to be wardeclared (unless you choose via factional warfare). as a npc corp player you dont live in the same world as the rest of us, you get relative safety; and no tax at the moment, you arent forced to work together. you have perks, tbh, if NPC corps actaully banded together and acted like a real corp , they'd be a decent fighting force. as it turns out they have pretty much zero costs and zero downsides. I've addressed this. Wardec immunity is still enjoyed by all the members of NPC corps yet the only ones who actually pay for that immunity are the high end mission runners and even they will pay quite a bit less than 11%. The industrialists, traders and miners in the NPC corps will still enjoy all the benefits of wardec immunity at no cost. Yes, you're quite right, of course. CCP should also change the broker fees in hi-sec to a base of 3.0-5.0% (0.5 = 3.0, 0.6 = 3.5... etc) and increase the station refinery tax accordingly. That "nudge" should not just be felt by mission runners.
Baugoti Amarr THORN Syndicate Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.10.20 21:04:00 - [58] Originally by: SomebodyKickedMyDog what should i have for dinner? The Dinner Test
Salmeria GoonFleet	Posted - 2009.10.20 21:08:00 - [59] I think its a good change simply because it will make players have to join a real corp for zero taxes. 11% isn't even that much.
Dharh Gallente Ace Adventure Corp	Posted - 2009.10.20 21:10:00 - [60] Frankly, if people really wanted to join a NPC corp/faction they should need standing and pay taxes. It only makes sense. Why in the heck would a corp/faction offer you protection for _free_? Makes no sense. People whining about PC corps should try harder to find good people. This is not a game with cute panda bears and rainbows. Space is a harsh mistress, just like the sea. If you aren't careful it will swallow you up and never spit you out.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.