EVE Search - Sticky:[Citadels] Changing NPC taxes

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

Sticky:[Citadels] Changing NPC taxes

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 6 post(s)
Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 59	Posted - 2016.03.03 20:19:55 - [1] - Quote Altrue wrote: Reprocessing tax in isk in NPC stations means more minerals on the market. Interesting. No it doesn't - the minerals go to the owner - they don't disappear.... Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 59	Posted - 2016.03.04 12:47:41 - [2] - Quote The 5m per jump does seem to be rather high - I'm sure the intention is not to cover the entire Clone Bay cost with merely 5 or so pilots. Why not make it something like 1m to start with and see how it goes? Why not, perhaps, introduce something 'more unique' to Citadels that actually encourages their use - like allow the jumping of clones within the same Citadel? You could even go as far as allowing the actual 'unplugging' of implants without losing them, perhaps even for a more significant cost (perhaps limiting that unplugging to Slots 1-5)? Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 59	Posted - 2016.03.04 12:59:13 - [3] - Quote Charles Burger wrote: What's the actual point of the 5 mil jump fee for NPC stations?...................... I am failing to see the point whatsoever. It seems like all con and no pro. What's the pro's of this change, from any angle? Who is it meant to help? The point is that running a Clone Bay in a Citadel will have a cost (in the new fuel-blocks) which, as suggested in the OP, is currently around 157m per month. Citadels cost a lot and running them will cost - EVE is a business game and like any business the investment of the isk is supposed to have a return (if you're doing it right). There needs to be a mechanism for charging that makes that sensible. The fee for NPCs 'needs' to be set at a level that players can undercut to make it cheaper to use Citadels whilst still covering their costs. In Red vs Blues case - both Red & Blue should put up their own Citadels and charge peanuts instead. Likewise Null Sec Alliances can offset their costs through other taxes and perhaps charge little if anything at all. Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 60	Posted - 2016.03.09 23:10:59 - [4] - Quote Have followed the thread closely - and believe I do understand the feelings expressed. I thought the JC cost too high - and think that has now been addressed. I too will feel the Tax increases - but, in the end, if 'safety' is wanted then it has to be paid for. Will this be a shock, yes, but perhaps a good one. Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 60	Posted - 2016.03.10 15:04:35 - [5] - Quote FWIW..... Imagine - 15 years ago there was a very detailed plan and in 2016 player owned and operated Citadels were due to be introduced. They were to have Markets. In the mean time NPC stations would have markets. NPC stations are 'invulnerable' (wherever they are they can't be destroyed). The Markets would have Broker Fees and Sales Tax. One day, however, the first of these would be able to be set by players - -> there must be room to wiggle. The latter would be a fixed fee. What should they be? Well, Real World examples are between 10-30% each! Hmmmm - too high for a game. Let's set the Sales Tax to a tiny 2.5% as we need isk sinks (because the crystal ball is very good and we know EVE will be awash with isk as we print it and hand it out free in great fat gobbets). We'll set the Broker Fees to an equally low 5% and let players save up to 1.5% max, more likely 1% - so 4% fees for dedicated traders. That will give the tiniest of wiggle room for Citadel-based markets to actually be viable. So - perhaps in many respects this is simply a very overdue fix for something that has been so very wrong. Big advantages to NPC stations still - so that value has to be paid for. It's a game - we're supposed to compete. It's not a trivial entertainment like so many 'games' are these days............ I may now be a Grr Goon - but it fits my grumpy and cynical nature after playing real games for over 45 years! Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 60	Posted - 2016.03.13 23:56:26 - [6] - Quote Kuekuatsheu wrote: .............................. And new players have to trade in citadels or loose 7.5% of their seller orders value to tax + broker's fees from the higher rate NPC stations. Is that: a) So bad? b) Actually what newer players do? Or is more likely/practicable that new(er) players sell to buy orders? Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 60	Posted - 2016.03.14 16:03:24 - [7] - Quote Drago Shouna wrote: Ok am I mis-reading something in the dev blog? According to the new one it says that for a Medium Citadel I need 4 separate rigs for full refine facilities even though only 3 slots are available? wtf?..................... Not mis-reading - if you want all 4 then build 2+ Medium Citadels and anchor them near each other even. Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 61	Posted - 2016.03.16 11:15:25 - [8] - Quote GreyGryphon wrote: The changes to reprocessing seem a little strange. I would like to see medium < large < XL, but I do not think reprocessing bands achieve that. If all T1 (52%) and T2 (55%) rigs all have the same bonuses regardless of size, then why not build two medium citadels instead of one large citadel. The ISK investment would be lower that way for basically the same result. The rigs should have better reprocessing efficiency as they grow in size to reward building a larger citadel. Then small groups would be able to use a medium citadel for all ores but at a lower efficiency. If they group grew then they would be able to build a large citadel to reach a higher efficiency. Completely agreed - could easily incorporate the following elements too: Simplified Reprocessing with extras Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 64	Posted - 2016.03.20 22:11:10 - [9] - Quote Gil Wallace wrote: I still have not seen a valid rebuttal to the fact that the proposed implimentations will have serious consequences to player retention. ............................. So why impliment something that you now blows up the supposed plans and goals and will also cause retention to be a bigger issue? TL:DR - Because what you're suggesting is rubbish. But then I'm a 'Grr Goon' - so of course I must have an evil agenda......But I'll try anyway. New players will neither notice nor care. Is there a vague possibility that they could be paying a teeny tiny bit more for items in stations, yes. Even possibly a whole 6% more - whoop de doop. That's nothing vs what poor unknowing youngsters pay when there are current grasping and evil traders about manipulating markets. I've watched PLEX go from <300m to >1,300m - 6% - piffle! Why has PLEX gone up like that - simple hyper-inflation caused by the fact that players can indeed 'print isk' themselves with relatively little effort. So - do we need more isk sinks - yes we do. If CCP had planned the roll out of Citadels a bit better - this change to NPC taxes would have happened a very logn time ago. But I may forgive them that. Will some of the rather poor traders leave because they want it easy and they whine so - yes - good riddance; although I rather suspect that they will come back - because there is no other game like EVE. The introduction of Citadels and competitive market fees isn't a cause for anyone to leave - just silly perceptions and a few whines. If you don't want to play with Citadels - don't - no one will force you too. And that's the real point. Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 64	Posted - 2016.03.21 15:04:14 - [10] - Quote Rob Kaichin wrote: ................... My point is this: making a ludicrous amount of ISK is unhealthy for the game and for the players. ............. Traders don't 'make isk' - they may amass wealth, but all their isk has come from players. ALL the isk comes from ratting and its equivalent(s). It's the actual players that, literally, make the isk. It grows on 'red ratting trees'. Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium

Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 67	Posted - 2016.04.18 11:38:32 - [11] - Quote Rek Seven wrote: Will citadels in wormholes have transaction tax? I don't think they should as there is no asset safety in wormhole space so it makes sense for wormholes to get some advantages. For the same reason that manufacturing has costs (workforce) so will running a market and processing orders. Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 67	Posted - 2016.04.18 13:02:12 - [12] - Quote Rek Seven wrote: Marcus Tedric wrote: Rek Seven wrote: Will citadels in wormholes have transaction tax? I don't think they should as there is no asset safety in wormhole space so it makes sense for wormholes to get some advantages. For the same reason that manufacturing has costs (workforce) so will running a market and processing orders. Manufacturing does not have a cost for workforce unless you are paying another player to make stuff for you. Either way, lore reasons are irrelevant. I just want to play a game that is designed well and ad fairly for all players. Okay - so then, why do you believe that a Citadel in a WH should cost any less than one in HS, LS or Null? Fairness would make all the costs more or less the same. You also seem not to grasp the concept of the System Indices either when it comes to manufacturing - for when building something it takes 10s of thousands of people who aren't the rich pod-pilots. But then you reject the 'lore' or logic. Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 68	Posted - 2016.04.19 08:23:57 - [13] - Quote Rek Seven wrote: ................... isk is not one of the materials required for manufacturing so please stop this dumb argument. Do you pay the crew on your ships, do you have to pay to refuel your ship?... NO, you don't! ........... Actually I have always fervently wished for ships to use fuel, need maintenance and crew to have 'pay' (which could all be simply wrapped up in a 'fuel' requirement. Indeed I only wish we had modified Einsteinian physics rather than (originally Star Wars inspired) flight-sim movement Isk in game, just like all 'money' IRL is not real - it's just a concept and used to relate transactions. As noted - you just want something - and it's not 'fairness'. Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 68	Posted - 2016.04.19 16:11:47 - [14] - Quote Lugh Crow-Slave wrote: Marcus Tedric wrote: As noted - you just want something - and it's not 'fairness'. How is wanting a trade off for no asset security not fair? Rek Seven wrote: ..................... It's simple; if there is no asset safety in W-space like there is everywhere else, wormholes should get some benefits that others space does not have. ...... WH do get benefits for that lack of safety - the chance to farm away for great rewards. That, for example, one can farm HS incusions for massive reward at little risk is a separate issue... Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 72	Posted - 2016.05.16 13:02:50 - [15] - Quote Julien Brellier wrote: It's annoying that we cannot see our tax rates in the Wallet>orders tab any longer They do still show them, but only the Sales Tax affected by Accounting skill is there (eg showing 1% instead of the standard 2%); however it doesn't show the Broker tax correctly affected by Broker Relations (ie it stays at 3%). Obviously I understand why it cannot show the individual result(s) when you actually put up a Sell Order, because that depends on NPC Corp and Faction standing. Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 74	Posted - 2016.05.27 12:43:46 - [16] - Quote Tsukino Stareine wrote: Will accounting skill reduce the sales tax?.................. Yes, it does - currently Accounting V will reduce it from 2% to 1% (perhaps 2.5% to 1.5% if they change it in the future to what they originally proposed) It's the Broker fees that the owner sets - which, I believe, you an set all the way to zero for yourself (managed by Access Lists). Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium

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.