Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 51 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Mia Markaya
Unlimited Blade Works.
5
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 15:50:14 -
[61] - Quote
Everyone loved when you took Clones out of the game CCP, and we all rejoiced when you decided to remove the standing requirement for installing clones in HS/LS Stations.
Why are you taking a step back and adding costs to something that your players praised you for and are happy with?
Make Citadels JC service great by giving them unique features ( like being able to in-station JC without triggering a cooldown that you already announced ) that justify their cost, but don't go around nerfing everything else in the game just to widen the gap. |
Morrigan LeSante
Black Omega Security The OSS
1306
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 15:51:06 -
[62] - Quote
Sim Cognito wrote:NPC taxes are an essential ISK sink and an immersion factor. We have too many ISK faucets. The changes are extremely positive.
Adjusting Contract fees and Jump Clone fees is also long overdue and I welcome it.
ISK sinks have this annoying habit of not affecting everyone equally. |
Tristan Agion
Viziam Amarr Empire
82
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 15:54:13 -
[63] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Initial figures show us maintaining a cloning bay in a Citadel will cost 157m ISK a month, we wanted to provide means for the owner to recoup that cost and even make a profit in general.
Maintaining a cloning bay in a Citadel will cost whatever you say it will cost. You can make it cost 157M ISK per month, or 157b ISK per month, or nothing. If you want, you can even make it earn the station owner 157M ISK per month just by existing.
This is a completely arbitrary number that is determined by you devs, and nobody and nothing else. You may have some reason or the other why you feel that having a bay should cost owners that much. Fine, let's hear that reason then so that we can evaluate it against the proposed charge for jump cloning.
But to pretend that jump cloning has some sort of necessary "physical" cost associated with it, as if all this is not simply a game that you are coding exactly the way you want to, is just absurd. If your cost estimate derives from some arbitrary consumption of resources and energy in game that you have decided upon, then the resulting price is still just as arbitrary as what it was derived from. |
Akrasjel Lanate
Naquatech Conglomerate Naquatech Syndicate
1880
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 15:54:26 -
[64] - Quote
Sim Cognito wrote:NPC taxes are an essential ISK sink and an immersion factor. We have too many ISK faucets. The changes are extremely positive.
Adjusting Contract fees and Jump Clone fees is also long overdue and I welcome it.
Finally, compression and reprocessing shouldn't be instant, but that's just me I guess.
Balance ISK faucets
Akrasjel Lanate
Founder and CEO of Naquatech Conglomerate
Executor of Naquatech Syndicate
Citizen of Solitude
|
Scotsman Howard
The Scope Gallente Federation
40
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 15:54:53 -
[65] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Scotsman Howard wrote:Considering they are one of the few groups in the game that could actually defend the stupid thing, people will use it. their attempt at holding pocos failed - i wouldn't put much faith in their ability to defend a citadel.
Yes because defending hundred of POCO across hundreds of systems that could be attacked 24 hours a day 7 days a week for the price of a war dec is certainly comparable to defending ONE citadel that is only vulnerable for a few hours a day (or however the owner puts the timer) with weaponry that will more than likely be actually useful for defending it.
Yes you are correct that these two items are comparable.
I'm not saying it would be easy, but it would be easier than POCOs from a logistics and organization standpoint.
Even if it is not goons, it would take a large entity to do what CCP is wanting done. |
Dave Stark
7882
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 15:56:17 -
[66] - Quote
Scotsman Howard wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Scotsman Howard wrote:Considering they are one of the few groups in the game that could actually defend the stupid thing, people will use it. their attempt at holding pocos failed - i wouldn't put much faith in their ability to defend a citadel. Yes because defending hundred of POCO across hundreds of systems that could be attacked 24 hours a day 7 days a week for the price of a war dec is certainly comparable to defending ONE citadel that is only vulnerable for a few hours a day (or however the owner puts the timer) with weaponry that will more than likely be actually useful for defending it. Yes you are correct that these two items are comparable. I'm not saying it would be easy, but it would be easier than POCOs from a logistics and organization standpoint. Even if it is not goons, it would take a large entity to do what CCP is wanting done.
i agree with you - citadels will be easier to defend than pocos.
i'm just saying i don't think it will be sufficiently easier such that goons will be able to do it. i also have no objection to being proven wrong on that front, though. |
Cristl
357
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 15:57:28 -
[67] - Quote
Hang on, members of big power blocks are getting free clone jumps, while Newbie McHighsec pays 5 mill per go?
I'm not sure this is such a good idea. Malcanis' law may exist, but there's no reason it needs to be actively enforced. |
Vulfen
Snuff Box Snuffed Out
184
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 15:57:48 -
[68] - Quote
Will you allow people to set a docking tax at a rate /m3?
Also will you be able to set all of these taxes at variable rates for different standings/relation to you? i.e i can set a 0.1 tax for alliance but a higher tax for none members?
Also can you add a mechanic where a citadel can be assigned for a person, so it makes it thier personal citadel and then rules will be based on that person. So industrial guys like myself in a PVP corp who want their own place can set up their own place for what they need. |
ApolloF117 HUN
Angels and Demons Inc. Mordus Angels
28
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 15:58:11 -
[69] - Quote
My only question is why "medium" citadels can't fit market module while they have the pg/cpu for that. like on the pos there is no restriction for modules (except high/low sec and sov) |
Aryth
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1899
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 16:01:45 -
[70] - Quote
So happy to see taxes in ISK. Makes things so much easier for owners and just in general.
Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.
Creator of Burn Jita
Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
|
|
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
CK-0FF Bad Intention
18
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 16:03:00 -
[71] - Quote
It's all pretty nice and reasonable except for three things: 1. Paying 5 mil to clone jump away from an NPC station seems a bit steep. It would greatly hurt new players who aren't connected enough to know of good citadels for their clones. Also the whole model of paying to jump out of a place seems really weird. How about a "rental fee" to maintain each inactive clone? That would be more friendly to new players who won't have as many clones, while also not penalizing use of the system so much.
2. Increasing taxes won't move most trade to citadels. Serious traders will never move most of their business to citadels unless they have absolutely nothing to lose if the citadel is destroyed or the owner hikes taxes. That means all assets would have to be easily available at a nearby location for free or a very small fee if the citadel were destroyed, and it would have to be possible to cancel all market orders and move everything out with minimal time or isk expenditure.
3. Increasing taxes will hurt the whole market. Unless there's an extremely easy and safe way to bypass the tax increases, they will eventually hurt everyone. First of all, it will make business a lot less profitable for station traders who keep the buy and sell orders up so everyone else has easy access. That means less orders for uncommon items because of higher brokers fees, and a significantly higher margin between buy and sell prices for common items. Second, it penalizes manufacturing because taxes have to be paid on both the raw materials and the finished product. Raising the cost of transferring items just ends up hurting everyone who doesn't already have everything they need. The rich stay rich, the poor stay poor, and almost everyone gets more annoyed.
If the general increase in taxes and fees is about the isk sink, it's really not the right place to look. Other ways to reduce inflation while improving gameplay instead of hurting it include having NPCs sell more useful items and/or services, making NPCs drop usable loot instead of bounties, making insurance pay back materials or salvage instead of isk, etc. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
2381
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 16:03:17 -
[72] - Quote
Cristl wrote:Hang on, members of big power blocks are getting free clone jumps, while Newbie McHighsec pays 5 mill per go?
I'm not sure this is such a good idea. Malcanis' law may exist, but there's no reason it needs to be actively enforced. Or, really, anyone who has the dosh to erect a medium citadel.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Obil Que
Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance
376
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 16:05:44 -
[73] - Quote
Tristan Agion wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Initial figures show us maintaining a cloning bay in a Citadel will cost 157m ISK a month, we wanted to provide means for the owner to recoup that cost and even make a profit in general.
Maintaining a cloning bay in a Citadel will cost whatever you say it will cost. You can make it cost 157M ISK per month, or 157b ISK per month, or nothing. If you want, you can even make it earn the station owner 157M ISK per month just by existing. This is a completely arbitrary number that is determined by you devs, and nobody and nothing else. You may have some reason or the other why you feel that having a bay should cost owners that much. Fine, let's hear that reason then so that we can evaluate it against the proposed charge for jump cloning. But to pretend that jump cloning has some sort of necessary "physical" cost associated with it, as if all this is not simply a game that you are coding exactly the way you want to, is just absurd. If your cost estimate derives from some arbitrary consumption of resources and energy in game that you have decided upon, then the resulting price is still just as arbitrary as what it was derived from.
The cost is the fuel required to run the clone service module at the citadel on a monthly basis. It is not a made up number.
|
Hendrink Collie
Blood Oath Foundation Adaptation.
102
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 16:05:45 -
[74] - Quote
Aryth wrote:So happy to see taxes in ISK. Makes things so much easier for owners and just in general.
Agreed. I'm pretty happy they are no longer going to take minerals for the tax. Smart move.
|
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1261
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 16:10:47 -
[75] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Those are fair points we've been discussing internally. Initial figures show us maintaining a cloning bay in a Citadel will cost 157m ISK a month, we wanted to provide means for the owner to recoup that cost and even make a profit in general.
sounds like a toning the costs down issue
T3's need to be versatile not have T2 resists, OP dps and tank obsoleting T2 ships entirely.
ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 highslots for droneboats
Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
|
Hairpins Blueprint
The Northerners Northern Coalition.
182
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 16:12:46 -
[76] - Quote
luobote kong wrote:Kenneth Feld wrote:luobote kong wrote:So the general drift is some people will in future have to ask permission from others to be able to play Eve competitively? I'm thinking small groups and solo players who also can't set up a market in a medium citadel. Good luck with that if that is your intention. Or have I missed something? Medium Citadels can't fit the market service module - L and XL only That is my point. Small groups and solo players are being coerced into other people's playstyle
7 Bil is not that much .... it's not that hard to get 7 bil isk.
And if you are Lazy Buy plex for $$ |
Hairpins Blueprint
The Northerners Northern Coalition.
182
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 16:16:24 -
[77] - Quote
MachineOfLovingGrace wrote:While I like the idea of more player control about eve, this is moving too far into the regions where other players can effectively control how and where I play eve for my taste. Eve is already a game that is at times as tedious and overcomplicated as it's fun and engaging. The market and jumpclone changes will only make this worse, even more so if you are a casual player without some big alliance logistic backbone. Every change that makes actual gameplay require more logistic/clicks/hassle in general will make casual scrubs like me pause and think if hitting "find game" in CS:GO isn't the better use of my time. Don't lose the "small guy" from focus when you plan some big poweblock endgame.
?
Just build your own Citadel and set tax to 0 for yourself problem solved. |
Scotsman Howard
The Scope Gallente Federation
43
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 16:17:52 -
[78] - Quote
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:It's all pretty nice and reasonable except for three things: 1. Paying 5 mil to clone jump away from an NPC station seems a bit steep. It would greatly hurt new players who aren't connected enough to know of good citadels for their clones. Also the whole model of paying to jump out of a place seems really weird. How about a recurring "rental fee" to maintain each inactive clone? That would be more friendly to new players who won't have as many clones, while also not penalizing use of the system so much.
2. Increasing taxes won't move most trade to citadels. Serious traders will never move most of their business to citadels unless they have absolutely nothing to lose if the citadel is destroyed or the owner hikes taxes. That means all assets would have to be easily available at a nearby location for free or a very small fee if the citadel were destroyed, and it would have to be possible to cancel all market orders and move everything out with minimal time or isk expenditure.
3. Increasing taxes will hurt the whole market. Unless there's an extremely easy and safe way to bypass the tax increases, they will eventually hurt everyone. First of all, it will make business a lot less profitable for station traders who keep the buy and sell orders up so everyone else has easy access. That means less orders for uncommon items because of higher brokers fees, and a significantly higher margin between buy and sell prices for common items. Second, it penalizes manufacturing because taxes have to be paid on both the raw materials and the finished product. Raising the cost of transferring items just ends up hurting everyone who doesn't already have everything they need. The rich stay rich, the poor stay poor, and almost everyone gets more annoyed.
If the general increase in taxes and fees is about the isk sink, it's really not the right place to look. Other ways to reduce inflation while improving gameplay instead of hurting it include having NPCs sell more useful items and/or services, making NPCs drop usable loot instead of bounties, making insurance pay back materials or salvage instead of isk, etc.
This. Said much better than my attempt earlier in the thread. |
Rollo Brinalle
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 16:22:24 -
[79] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Those are fair points we've been discussing internally. Initial figures show us maintaining a cloning bay in a Citadel will cost 157m ISK a month, we wanted to provide means for the owner to recoup that cost and even make a profit in general.
5m per jump is crazy for NPC jumps and why do they have to recoup their cost? If I put up a POS now it cost me isk and you're not doing anything now to help me recoup my monthly fuel cost? Have a JC bay is a convenience and if you want that convienience then a corp / alliance needs to take that into consideration and determine if they want to offer it.
|
luobote kong
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 16:31:06 -
[80] - Quote
Hairpins Blueprint wrote:luobote kong wrote:Kenneth Feld wrote:luobote kong wrote:So the general drift is some people will in future have to ask permission from others to be able to play Eve competitively? I'm thinking small groups and solo players who also can't set up a market in a medium citadel. Good luck with that if that is your intention. Or have I missed something? Medium Citadels can't fit the market service module - L and XL only That is my point. Small groups and solo players are being coerced into other people's playstyle 7 Bil is not that much .... it's not that hard to get 7 bil isk. And if you are Lazy Buy plex for $$
As you say, to have 'level' playing field you will now need 7 billion+. Not really a winning debating point |
|
Germaq
FUITA Dead Terrorists
1
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 16:35:01 -
[81] - Quote
Hairpins Blueprint wrote:MachineOfLovingGrace wrote:While I like the idea of more player control about eve, this is moving too far into the regions where other players can effectively control how and where I play eve for my taste. Eve is already a game that is at times as tedious and overcomplicated as it's fun and engaging. The market and jumpclone changes will only make this worse, even more so if you are a casual player without some big alliance logistic backbone. Every change that makes actual gameplay require more logistic/clicks/hassle in general will make casual scrubs like me pause and think if hitting "find game" in CS:GO isn't the better use of my time. Don't lose the "small guy" from focus when you plan some big poweblock endgame. ? Just build your own Citadel and set tax to 0 for yourself problem solved. No limit to JC in station / removing timer when swaping clone in same station. Bad changes? lol this is amazing for pvp. go on small Nano Roam with snakes / than swap for crystals for solo and than swap for slaves into bigger fleet or whatever. Looks perfect for me ^^
It's great for the serious PVP player who has wealth and expertise. It's horrid for a casual player, raising the bar for them. Lots of people but a ship, fly it for an hour, log off and come back next Saturday night and repeat until they die. They then go back to a known, stocked hub, for a new ship and repeat. Expanded options should not drive out this kind of player. |
Memphis Baas
1265
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 16:35:44 -
[82] - Quote
For everyone complaining of higher NPC taxes (here and in the reddit thread): CCP needs to have more ISK sinks, which they are achieving through the higher taxes and through the ISK loss rather than mineral loss for refining.
For CCP: if you really want to introduce a strong ISK sink, you have to introduce something that the people with trillions of ISK want to buy. We really wanted to buy the skill injectors; you saw how much plex trade that caused. Find something that's as desirable. Maybe some new skins, I don't know. |
MachineOfLovingGrace
The Bastards The Bastards.
13
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 16:37:47 -
[83] - Quote
Hairpins Blueprint wrote:
?
Just build your own Citadel and set tax to 0 for yourself problem solved.
No limit to JC in station / removing timer when swaping clone in same station.
Bad changes? lol this is amazing for pvp. go on small Nano Roam with snakes / than swap for crystals for solo and than swap for slaves into bigger fleet or whatever.
Looks perfect for me ^^
We might have different definitions of the word "just" then. ;) |
RainReaper
RRN Assembly INC Straw Hat Legion
28
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 16:38:17 -
[84] - Quote
I have a question. since you are merging reprocessing and compression services will the new module require 10 blocks every hour? Because each induvidual module required 5 blocks att first i guess it would only make sence? Oh and another thing i dont think anyone have brought up. Medium citadels are meant to replace the starbases, and starbase's Repreocessing modules could only reprocess ores and such. Can we reprocess modules and ships inside a Astrahus? |
rsantos
TEC-NOLOGY Sorry We're In Your Space Eh
49
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 16:42:09 -
[85] - Quote
Boo! just bad!
especialy the "no limits" on citadels... Fisics says no to ulimited office space! limited office space will bring more income to citadel owners than increasing taxes on npc station. Just saying! |
Johnathan Severasse
Dixon Cox Butte Preservation Society Psychotic Tendencies.
91
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 16:50:31 -
[86] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Initial figures show us maintaining a cloning bay in a Citadel will cost 157m ISK a month, we wanted to provide means for the owner to recoup that cost and even make a profit in general.
No poors allowed. |
Akrasjel Lanate
Naquatech Conglomerate Naquatech Syndicate
1881
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 16:50:58 -
[87] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:For everyone complaining of higher NPC taxes (here and in the reddit thread): CCP needs to have more ISK sinks, which they are achieving through the higher taxes and through the ISK loss rather than mineral loss for refining.
For CCP: if you really want to introduce a strong ISK sink, you have to introduce something that the people with trillions of ISK want to buy. We really wanted to buy the skill injectors; you saw how much plex trade that caused. Find something that's as desirable. Maybe some new skins, I don't know.
They could remove insurence
Akrasjel Lanate
Founder and CEO of Naquatech Conglomerate
Executor of Naquatech Syndicate
Citizen of Solitude
|
Memphis Baas
1265
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 16:51:27 -
[88] - Quote
rsantos wrote:Limited office space will bring more income to citadel owners.
That's only true if they keep the current mechanic where rent prices increase based on how full the station is.
But they're not keeping that mechanic. Rent prices in citadels will stay the same until it's full, then you won't be able to rent more offices there. So instead of the server-calculated price, the citadel owner can just log in everyday and increase his fees based on how many people have an office, without reaching a cap where more renters are artificially prevented from renting.
Citadel owners will get to play a game that CCP is playing every day: change prices and watch how many people cancel the subscription. Lower the price, get more rentals, increase the price get fewer rentals. Complete control for the citadel owner. Complete repercussions. NO artificial limits.
I like.
|
Dave Stark
7883
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 16:51:37 -
[89] - Quote
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:Memphis Baas wrote:For everyone complaining of higher NPC taxes (here and in the reddit thread): CCP needs to have more ISK sinks, which they are achieving through the higher taxes and through the ISK loss rather than mineral loss for refining.
For CCP: if you really want to introduce a strong ISK sink, you have to introduce something that the people with trillions of ISK want to buy. We really wanted to buy the skill injectors; you saw how much plex trade that caused. Find something that's as desirable. Maybe some new skins, I don't know. They could remove insurence
or incursions. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
17528
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 16:51:44 -
[90] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:For everyone complaining of higher NPC taxes (here and in the reddit thread): CCP needs to have more ISK sinks, which they are achieving through the higher taxes and through the ISK loss rather than mineral loss for refining.
For CCP: if you really want to introduce a strong ISK sink, you have to introduce something that the people with trillions of ISK want to buy. We really wanted to buy the skill injectors; you saw how much plex trade that caused. Find something that's as desirable. Maybe some new skins, I don't know.
EDIT: Also, everyone predicting that people will ignore citadel markets and stay in Jita, that's true, until they remove Jita. I believe the end goal is to have NO NPC stations at all. So the whole "recovering your assets is free" thing is eventually not going to be quite true. It should be interesting to see; no game has ever modeled an economic collapse before, and EVE's economy is quite an advanced simulator, pretty much the perfect testing platform.
If people ignore citadels markets then that will be evidence that the npc trading taxes have been set too low...
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 51 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |