EVE Search - Sticky:[Citadels] Changing NPC taxes

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 [?]

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)
Rob Kaichin Empire Assault Corp dead terrorists 82	Posted - 2016.03.17 23:17:10 - [1231] - Quote Teckos Pech wrote: My point is, and has been, if we were to go and look at various changes over the years that Devs have made we'll find a subset of players who are butthurt about losing their "style of play". You keep saying I'm not talking about players, but I am. You just aren't getting the message. The Devs make changes, somebody's style of play is negatively impacted. It happens. Edit: Wrong region fuel blocks? I suspect people do this all the time. For example, you might want a Gallente POS but are in "Caldari/Caldari NPC space". When I was running a POS farm, some people had Gallente POS others Caldari. And we made a **** ton of blocks too. Sooo...not sure what the point of that was. Edit: And I have lived in NPC space, sov space, LS, HS and NS. I have seen ship doctrines come and go in all areas of space because of Devs, so don't hand me that crap about "This is about players [...] within...NPC space." You keep setting that up as some sort of important distinction when I contend it is irrelevant when it comes to making the game better. Sometimes, Teckos, I wonder if you ignore the context of the posts because it suits you, or if you're just plain lazy. Ship doctrines and fittings are frankly immaterial to what I was talking about, and the only way I can presume you thought fit to include them was if you didn't care at all about reading my posts. I'm not talking about what happens in space, I'm talking about the nature of space itself. It's the reason why you can't anchor bubbles in empire space, why Concord exists, why you can only build Scaps in Sov. It's the fundamental concepts of Eve design. That's what I'm talking about. If CCP wishes to make all areas of space the same, they can. It might be the only move which literally everyone hates, but they could do it. If it "makes the game better" what would you give up? Everything you find enjoyable? Let's remove Null-sec: WH brawls are much higher skill and so much cooler to watch. There are things players enjoy to do with the area of space they live in. It's not making their game better if we remove their space.
Erebus 'TheChin' Sundance Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 2	Posted - 2016.03.17 23:20:29 - [1232] - Quote What is this loony clone fee's and NPC station tax hike of which you speak? Any smaller corp *that can* afford these mystical citadels will most likely not want anyone near them unless they are blue, the large alliances want some extra e peen, I get it, it's also kinda cool, however this wont stop most of us using the npc markets, even if more expensive, the large alliances will be able to use them as trade hubs sure, but it benefits no one else, lets not beat around the bush here. CCP, you are better than this, common now. If you whip people and they still don't want to do what you say, maybe stop whipping them...
GreyGryphon The Spartains 13	Posted - 2016.03.17 23:39:11 - [1233] - Quote @Lucas I have been more than civil with you only to have you make insulting and belligerent remarks. There is only one thing we agree on; this conversation is over. Missile Rebalance
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7407	Posted - 2016.03.17 23:51:37 - [1234] - Quote Sgt Ocker wrote: You were specifically talking about SEEDING Citadels - You totally avoided that in your "multi quote shite" response. No, I didn't. You asked a simple question and got a simple answer. The truth is you'll accept no answer because you're just being argumentative. Sgt Ocker wrote: Don't care that T3's are good for hauling small expensive stuff - I want to you from your experience to tell us who is going to be seeding Citadels without contracting facilities and how. I don't care if you don't care. You think haulers who haul constantly all day long are suddenly going to not haul to a citadel because of fear of ganking? You are out of your mind. Sgt Ocker wrote: Placing a few expensive niche items in a Citadel may benefit from lower taxes but who is going to go out of their way to buy them if they can't get everything else they need in the same place. Players looking for a good price. Sgt Ocker wrote: I'll pay more for convenience rather than chase around to different places just to save a mil or 2 isk, I imagine thousands of others will as well - I wonder why Jita and Amarr are so popular. It isn't because they are the cheapest option. Good for you. When you wake up one day and are also every other EVE player, let me know. Until then what you do is pretty much irrelevant. Sgt Ocker wrote: Yes CCP will add Contracts "eventually" (that is the key word here) What do players, traders, logistics personal for groups, etc do in the meantime. They adapt. Seriously guy, I'm not even sure what point you are trying to make at the moment since you're foaming at the mouth so heavily. If you think citadels won't be used then what's your worry? Ignore them and move on while the rest of us get used to what they can do. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7407	Posted - 2016.03.17 23:55:02 - [1235] - Quote GreyGryphon wrote: @Lucas I have been more than civil with you only to have you make insulting and belligerent remarks. There is only one thing we agree on; this conversation is over. Bull, you've repeatedly claimed I've said things I haven't. I've not insulted you once. I've simply pointed out how making a medium citadel do everything is a bad idea and you've gone off the rails about how I must be demanding everyone plays in the same way. People can play however they want they just can't expect CCP to make up for it when they make bad choices or refuse to adapt to change. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Gevlin Fink Operations The Volition Cult 278	Posted - 2016.03.17 23:58:56 - [1236] - Quote Sorry for not reading the previous 62 pages. For the RP station owners will the be an ability to have an option to set its taxes to be inline with a NPC corporation? Allowing the station placed in Providence to reward Ammar loyalists. Someday I will have the time to play. For now it is mining afk in High sec. In Cheap ships
Teckos Pech The Executives Executive Outcomes 4811	Posted - 2016.03.18 01:15:01 - [1237] - Quote Rob Kaichin wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: My point is, and has been, if we were to go and look at various changes over the years that Devs have made we'll find a subset of players who are butthurt about losing their "style of play". You keep saying I'm not talking about players, but I am. You just aren't getting the message. The Devs make changes, somebody's style of play is negatively impacted. It happens. Edit: Wrong region fuel blocks? I suspect people do this all the time. For example, you might want a Gallente POS but are in "Caldari/Caldari NPC space". When I was running a POS farm, some people had Gallente POS others Caldari. And we made a **** ton of blocks too. Sooo...not sure what the point of that was. Edit: And I have lived in NPC space, sov space, LS, HS and NS. I have seen ship doctrines come and go in all areas of space because of Devs, so don't hand me that crap about "This is about players [...] within...NPC space." You keep setting that up as some sort of important distinction when I contend it is irrelevant when it comes to making the game better. Sometimes, Teckos, I wonder if you ignore the context of the posts because it suits you, or if you're just plain lazy. Ship doctrines and fittings are frankly immaterial to what I was talking about, and the only way I can presume you thought fit to include them was if you didn't care at all about reading my posts. I'm not talking about what happens in space, I'm talking about the nature of space itself. It's the reason why you can't anchor bubbles in empire space, why Concord exists, why you can only build Scaps in Sov. It's the fundamental concepts of Eve design. That's what I'm talking about. If CCP wishes to make all areas of space the same, they can. It might be the only move which literally everyone hates, but they could do it. If it "makes the game better" what would you give up? Everything you find enjoyable? Let's remove Null-sec: WH brawls are much higher skill and so much cooler to watch. There are things players enjoy to do with the area of space they live in. It's not making their game better if we remove their space. And sometimes I wonder if you continue to ignore the larger context because it suits you. When confronted with the fact that people's play styles have been affected by Dev intervention in the game you just go, "Yah, but that isn't what I'm talking about this very second." Again, you come across as intellectually dishonest with all this hand waving away of things. You basically insulate yourself from all other change that have affected players by saying, "Oh, but that doesn't pertain to this case." No you are absolutely not talking about the fundamental nature of Eve design. You are talking about a much more limited aspect of the game, so don't hand me this nonsense about fundamental Eve design. Here let me quote you. Quote: This is about players being able to group together within the equal mechanics of NPC space. That is just one aspect of the game. And those players are here complaining because they see their way of playing as changing and they are assuming for the worse. I pointed out where such changes have happened quite a bit. I bring them up and you hand wave them away. Each and every time, even when the **ing apply. I already brought up PI vs. NPC sell orders. I had a number of alts living in NPC space at the time. It was something that negatively affected my game. Then they shifted over to POCOs...again, negatively affecting my game. And not just me, but lots of people. I mean look at this **. And more. And more stupid. Oh noes, the economy!!!Sgt Ocker is that you?Oh dear. And people adapted and the economy survived. And look, the break downs were similar to now (NS vs. HS). Many of the arguments were similar to now. I'm sorry, it is the same reaction we have seen before. And all areas of space are not going to be the same. Just as in NS and HS where POCOs and POS can be shot, same thing with citadels. It has always been the case that when a player puts something down in space it can be shot. HS though you'll first need to war dec the corp/alliance of the citadel. And they just cannot shoot it willy nilly whenever they want. Only during windows of vulnerability. And to be honest I always felt the ability to tear down a POS before a war starts was unfortunate. Removed yet another potential conflict driver and reduced risk. Also, the costs of asset recovery will be faster and cheaper in HS. And you can get more traffic in HS. In NS it maybe hard to turn a profit with a citadel. In HS if it works out your citadel could make you some decent ISK. And nobody is removing their space. Concord will still be there. Missions will still be there. NPC stations will still be there, although more expensive. It will change, but as I have noted, that has happened before. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
Sgt Ocker Kenshin. DARKNESS. 859	Posted - 2016.03.18 01:30:39 - [1238] - Quote Lucas Kell They adapt. [:roll: wrote: Seriously guy, I'm not even sure what point you are trying to make at the moment since you're foaming at the mouth so heavily. If you think citadels won't be used then what's your worry? Ignore them and move on while the rest of us get used to what they can do. You do like making presumptions while not actually answering questions posed to you. You state you are a trader then make contradictory statements about the market and how players use it. Your awesome at avoiding any real answers. No I think haulers who haul every day will not be hauling to Citadels because they have no way of accepting contracts to haul - Unless everyone who needs inventory moved suddenly trusts every hauler in the game by using item exchange contracts - A lot of stuff will not get hauled to Citadels. It matters little that CCP will add contracting eventually - The roll out of Citadels and functionality at that time will matter far more. Right now the most fundamental part of running a successful market is not there. Logistics is the backbone of trading, without it markets will flounder. Ask CCP to remove courier contracts for a week or two - Watch the impact it has on everything to do with Eve. If you had a growing retail shop and were moving to new premises, would you opt to go to a place that has less access than you have now?? If you are a truck driver who delivers to retail outlets and one of them is really difficult to access, how much of a priority is it for you to deliver there? How much more are you going to charge the customer for your inconvenience, a cost which must then be passed on to customers for the outlet to remain viable. You say I can't speak for "every player" and I agree but are you not doing the same with your simplified "people will adapt" - What if "people" can't or don't want to go to the effort of adapting? Of course, the answer to all of this is simple - Everything in Eve costs a bit more from NPC stations and Citadel Trade Hubs fail. But then CCP always has the option of introducing further punitive measures to try and force players out of NPC stations...... PS; Try responding to a post without the multi quoting - That way others can respond in kind without 1st having to delete 90% of the drivel you write. My opinions are mine. If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Bad Bobby Bring Me Sunshine In Tea We Trust 1322	Posted - 2016.03.18 02:18:08 - [1239] - Quote Teckos Pech wrote: Bad Bobby wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: If I see a buy order in a station at a good price and I can sell a large portion or all of my stock there...yeah. And by a "good price" you mean less than NPC hub prices? Because, as you said, the buyer is doing this to save a few isk. No. So is the buyer offering more than NPC hub prices or is he matching the NPC hub price? Lucas Kell wrote: I do have a fair amount of experience growing a market out in solitude from a basically empty station, and it's surprising how quickly even in a fairly empty section of space like that the orders help push each other and the market emerges. What were your criteria for selecting the station?
Teckos Pech The Executives Executive Outcomes 4811	Posted - 2016.03.18 02:54:38 - [1240] - Quote Bad Bobby wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: Bad Bobby wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: If I see a buy order in a station at a good price and I can sell a large portion or all of my stock there...yeah. And by a "good price" you mean less than NPC hub prices? Because, as you said, the buyer is doing this to save a few isk. No. So is the buyer offering more than NPC hub prices or is he matching the NPC hub price? Is this infeasible or unwise? "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
Teckos Pech The Executives Executive Outcomes 4811	Posted - 2016.03.18 02:56:00 - [1241] - Quote Sgt Ocker wrote: No I think haulers who haul every day will not be hauling to Citadels because they have no way of accepting contracts to haul.... For the first release.... Oh, and I doubt people will move until they unwind their existing positions. My guess is the transaction tax and the broker's fee will not be retroactive--i.e. you are not going to have to pay it for existing orders. So, you have very, very little incentive to take down an existing order. But you could set up buy orders to start building inventory to sell in a citadel, if you so choose, for later sale. Yes, the initial lack of contracts is unfortunate. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
Bad Bobby Bring Me Sunshine In Tea We Trust 1322	Posted - 2016.03.18 04:04:00 - [1242] - Quote Teckos Pech wrote: Bad Bobby wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: Bad Bobby wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: If I see a buy order in a station at a good price and I can sell a large portion or all of my stock there...yeah. And by a "good price" you mean less than NPC hub prices? Because, as you said, the buyer is doing this to save a few isk. No. So is the buyer offering more than NPC hub prices or is he matching the NPC hub price? Is this infeasible or unwise? You haven't given me enough data for me to answer that. But a hypothetical from a person that is not experienced with trade is more likely to resemble a real players "first attempt" at something. That's informative, but generally players go on to refine their approach. My perspective is that of a veteran trader. I would expect a large buy order at a non-competitive price that is placed in a station with no pre-existing traffic to take a long time to fill. I expect that your hypothetical person would also discover this. I wonder what he would do next? Given that broker fees are the incentive for a person to install and maintain a market service module, it's likely they are going to set it to a non-zero value. We can probably assume that total game-wide broker fees are going to go up substantially. The impact of that on a players order placing behavior is going to be interesting. I'd expect it to discourage the placement of orders that don't fill.
Bad Bobby Bring Me Sunshine In Tea We Trust 1322	Posted - 2016.03.18 04:12:10 - [1243] - Quote I'd like to know how ranged buy orders are going to behave. Because if you set a broker fee of zero at your Citadel and place ranged buy orders from it, you'll be picking up stock from NPC stations while paying your player-set zero broker fee for the order. Also if you place a ranged buy order in hi-sec or low-sec now, you know you can at least access all the goods you buy. That's not the case if Citadels trigger ranged buy orders.
Bad Bobby Bring Me Sunshine In Tea We Trust 1322	Posted - 2016.03.18 04:22:57 - [1244] - Quote Teckos Pech wrote: Oh, and I doubt people will move until they unwind their existing positions. My guess is the transaction tax and the broker's fee will not be retroactive--i.e. you are not going to have to pay it for existing orders. I'd like to see that confirmed. I certainly wouldn't look kindly on a market purge or a retroactive tax bill on patch day. I'd expect transaction tax to be retro-active because it's charged at sale and I doubt CCP is going to go to the effort of flagging all the pre-patch orders for a tax exemption. So that would mean that some pre-existing orders that were profitable will become unprofitable at the point of patching.
Anhenka Infinite Point Violence of Action. 1578	Posted - 2016.03.18 04:34:18 - [1245] - Quote Bad Bobby wrote: I'd like to know how ranged buy orders are going to behave. Because if you set a broker fee of zero at your Citadel and place ranged buy orders from it, you'll be picking up stock from NPC stations while paying your player-set zero broker fee for the order. Also if you place a ranged buy order in hi-sec or low-sec now, you know you can at least access all the goods you buy. That's not the case if Citadels trigger ranged buy orders. MVP of the last 30 pages, right here. If CCP thinks it's the problem, I guess the simple and lazy way would be to restrict citadels to station only buy orders. I rather expect they will just leave it alone though, similar to the current system where you can get low broker fee's across a whole region by listing from a single station.
Bad Bobby Bring Me Sunshine In Tea We Trust 1323	Posted - 2016.03.18 04:37:44 - [1246] - Quote Anhenka wrote: Bad Bobby wrote: I'd like to know how ranged buy orders are going to behave. Because if you set a broker fee of zero at your Citadel and place ranged buy orders from it, you'll be picking up stock from NPC stations while paying your player-set zero broker fee for the order. Also if you place a ranged buy order in hi-sec or low-sec now, you know you can at least access all the goods you buy. That's not the case if Citadels trigger ranged buy orders. MVP of the last 30 pages, right here. If CCP thinks it's the problem, I guess the simple and lazy way would be to restrict citadels to station only buy orders. I rather expect they will just leave it alone though, similar to the current system where you can get low broker fee's across a whole region by listing from a single station. So if you are in a 0% broker fee Citadel 1 jump from Jita placing 1 jump ranged buy orders you can circumvent the broker fees while continuing to trade at your preferred NPC venue? Erm... ok. I can afford a L+ Citadel to facilitate my Jita trading, but what about those that cant?
Teckos Pech The Executives Executive Outcomes 4811	Posted - 2016.03.18 04:45:40 - [1247] - Quote Bad Bobby wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: Oh, and I doubt people will move until they unwind their existing positions. My guess is the transaction tax and the broker's fee will not be retroactive--i.e. you are not going to have to pay it for existing orders. I'd like to see that confirmed. I certainly wouldn't look kindly on a market purge or a retroactive tax bill on patch day. I'd expect transaction tax to be retro-active because it's charged at sale and I doubt CCP is going to go to the effort of flagging all the pre-patch orders for a tax exemption. So that would mean that some pre-existing orders that were profitable will become unprofitable at the point of patching. Well, it certainly would be a ****-punch to every trader in the game to log in and find out that CCP took out a bunch of extra ISK. That would indeed be a dumb, dumb move. It might not be possible to not do it for the transaction tax though if it does occur at the time of sale, and technically one could argue that is not retroactive. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
Anhenka Infinite Point Violence of Action. 1578	Posted - 2016.03.18 04:49:57 - [1248] - Quote Bad Bobby wrote: Anhenka wrote: Bad Bobby wrote: I'd like to know how ranged buy orders are going to behave. Because if you set a broker fee of zero at your Citadel and place ranged buy orders from it, you'll be picking up stock from NPC stations while paying your player-set zero broker fee for the order. Also if you place a ranged buy order in hi-sec or low-sec now, you know you can at least access all the goods you buy. That's not the case if Citadels trigger ranged buy orders. MVP of the last 30 pages, right here. If CCP thinks it's the problem, I guess the simple and lazy way would be to restrict citadels to station only buy orders. I rather expect they will just leave it alone though, similar to the current system where you can get low broker fee's across a whole region by listing from a single station. So if you are in a 0% broker fee Citadel 1 jump from Jita placing 1 jump ranged buy orders you can circumvent the broker fees while continuing to trade at your preferred NPC venue? Erm... ok. I can afford a L+ Citadel to facilitate my Jita trading, but what about those that cant? Probably. But you would have to pay the NPC broker fee if you wanted to resell it in the station, or pick it up and haul it to your own station to sell. Seems rather inconvenient to do, if the alternative is buying and selling from the same Citadel.
Anhenka Infinite Point Violence of Action. 1578	Posted - 2016.03.18 04:53:02 - [1249] - Quote Bad Bobby wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: Oh, and I doubt people will move until they unwind their existing positions. My guess is the transaction tax and the broker's fee will not be retroactive--i.e. you are not going to have to pay it for existing orders. I'd like to see that confirmed. I certainly wouldn't look kindly on a market purge or a retroactive tax bill on patch day. I'd expect transaction tax to be retro-active because it's charged at sale and I doubt CCP is going to go to the effort of flagging all the pre-patch orders for a tax exemption. So that would mean that some pre-existing orders that were profitable will become unprofitable at the point of patching. For a trader with accounting V, Sales tax is only going from .75% to 1%. Probably not a ton of people trading high volume high value items on an end margin of less than .25% Seriously doubt CCP will do anything special for those few cases.
Bad Bobby Bring Me Sunshine In Tea We Trust 1327	Posted - 2016.03.18 05:04:23 - [1250] - Quote Anhenka wrote: Probably. But you would have to pay the NPC broker fee if you wanted to resell it in the station, or pick it up and haul it to your own station to sell. Seems rather inconvenient to do, if the alternative is buying and selling from the same Citadel. In the case I'm describing, you would place your buy orders in the Citadel and place your sell orders at Jita 4-4. The majority of your stock would land directly in Jita 4-4 and what little doesn't can be moved by a combination of asset safety and courier contracts. If you choose Niyabainen for the sake of argument, your 1 jump range will only include Jita, New Caldari and Perimeter. It's not that inconvenient for a 5% advantage over anyone who doesn't do the same. I'm not sure how useful comparing that to buying and selling in the same Citadel is, because Jita population isn't something that you can just summon to the doorstep of your citadel on a whim.
Bad Bobby Bring Me Sunshine In Tea We Trust 1327	Posted - 2016.03.18 05:08:18 - [1251] - Quote Anhenka wrote: Bad Bobby wrote: Teckos Pech wrote: Oh, and I doubt people will move until they unwind their existing positions. My guess is the transaction tax and the broker's fee will not be retroactive--i.e. you are not going to have to pay it for existing orders. I'd like to see that confirmed. I certainly wouldn't look kindly on a market purge or a retroactive tax bill on patch day. I'd expect transaction tax to be retro-active because it's charged at sale and I doubt CCP is going to go to the effort of flagging all the pre-patch orders for a tax exemption. So that would mean that some pre-existing orders that were profitable will become unprofitable at the point of patching. For a trader with accounting V, Sales tax is only going from .75% to 1%. Probably not a ton of people trading high volume high value items on an end margin of less than .25% Seriously doubt CCP will do anything special for those few cases. I don't expect CCP to deal with those cases, but it's something they might want to spell out so that people don't get nasty surprises. I expect collateral damage, but because it's needed for change, not because CCP had no idea it would happen or didn't give people the heads up that would have allowed it to be avoided.
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7408	Posted - 2016.03.18 08:05:24 - [1252] - Quote Sgt Ocker wrote: You do like making presumptions while not actually answering questions posed to you. You aren't posing questions, you're basically making a wailing noise. Sgt Ocker wrote: No I think haulers who haul every day will not be hauling to Citadels because they have no way of accepting contracts to haul - Unless everyone who needs inventory moved suddenly trusts every hauler in the game by using item exchange contracts - A lot of stuff will not get hauled to Citadels. It matters little that CCP will add contracting eventually - The roll out of Citadels and functionality at that time will matter far more. So wait, you think nobody hauls their own stuff? Go ahead and scan a whole bunch of hauling ships. Anything that doesn't contain a plastic wrap isn't hauling on contract. I think you'll be surprised how many there are. Sgt Ocker wrote: Right now the most fundamental part of running a successful market is not there. Logistics is the backbone of trading, without it markets will flounder. We simply disagree on it being the most fundamental part, and as of yet you've given me no reason the think you have a clue what you are talking about. Like many players it seems like you've heard about game mechanics by rough description and are guessing. Sure, lack of contacts will make the market harder to seed, but it's definitely not even close to the only thing that matters. Bear in mind you can still contract to the nearest station (probably in system) then haul yourself that last bit. Sgt Ocker wrote: If you had a growing retail shop and were moving to new premises, would you opt to go to a place that has less access than you have now?? Depends on the benefits, if the rent was significantly reduced, I was able to work around the lack of access and the access would be improved going forwards, then yes, probably. Sgt Ocker wrote: You say I can't speak for "every player" and I agree but are you not doing the same with your simplified "people will adapt" - What if "people" can't or don't want to go to the effort of adapting? Then as always they will fall behind and those of us adapting will roll around in isk laughing. "PS; Try responding to a post without the multi quoting - That way others can respond in kind without 1st having to delete 90% of the drivel you write." I prefer tackling the points one at a time especially when I'm dealing with, should we say, people with reduced capability to put it politely. If dealing with someone quoting part of a post confuses you it's no wonder you can't figure out the market. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7408	Posted - 2016.03.18 08:13:10 - [1253] - Quote Bad Bobby wrote: Lucas Kell wrote: I do have a fair amount of experience growing a market out in solitude from a basically empty station, and it's surprising how quickly even in a fairly empty section of space like that the orders help push each other and the market emerges. What were your criteria for selecting the station? It had to be near empty of player orders, relatively central and have manufacture facilities. Bad Bobby wrote: I'd like to know how ranged buy orders are going to behave. Because if you set a broker fee of zero at your Citadel and place ranged buy orders from it, you'll be picking up stock from NPC stations while paying your player-set zero broker fee for the order. That's always been the case, brokers fee is paid from whatever station you set the order at at the rate based on your standings at that station. Just another benefit to owning/using a citadel. You might set up your large for your Jita trading, but you'd also benefit from giving other people the opportunity to do the same, say for a 1% fee. Bad Bobby wrote: Also if you place a ranged buy order in hi-sec or low-sec now, you know you can at least access all the goods you buy. That's not the case if Citadels trigger ranged buy orders. The asset recovery can be used at all times and is free to stations in the same system, so you'll just be able to recover it out of the citadel then ship it. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Bad Bobby Bring Me Sunshine In Tea We Trust 1327	Posted - 2016.03.18 08:45:10 - [1254] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: Bad Bobby wrote: Lucas Kell wrote: I do have a fair amount of experience growing a market out in solitude from a basically empty station, and it's surprising how quickly even in a fairly empty section of space like that the orders help push each other and the market emerges. What were your criteria for selecting the station? It had to be near empty of player orders, relatively central and have manufacture facilities. Those look like perfectly sensible criteria. Why were broker fees not a criteria in your selection? Lucas Kell wrote: Bad Bobby wrote: I'd like to know how ranged buy orders are going to behave. Because if you set a broker fee of zero at your Citadel and place ranged buy orders from it, you'll be picking up stock from NPC stations while paying your player-set zero broker fee for the order. That's always been the case, brokers fee is paid from whatever station you set the order at at the rate based on your standings at that station. Indeed. It's something I've depended on for some of my trading strategies. But in the past the gap between the haves and the have-nots wasn't nearly as big as is proposed, I'm wondering how that will impact who can access various types of trading gameplay.
Rob Kaichin Empire Assault Corp Dead Terrorists 82	Posted - 2016.03.18 09:02:57 - [1255] - Quote Where is this idea coming from that the buy orders filed in the Citadel can buy items in other stations? The initial announcement, as I understand it, was that buy orders within Citadels are only available (to sell to) within the Citadels themselves, as with the sell orders and the like.
Bad Bobby Bring Me Sunshine In Tea We Trust 1327	Posted - 2016.03.18 09:12:32 - [1256] - Quote Rob Kaichin wrote: Where is this idea coming from that the buy orders filed in the Citadel can buy items in other stations? The initial announcement, as I understand it, was that buy orders within Citadels are only available (to sell to) within the Citadels themselves, as with the sell orders and the like. Have you got a quote from CCP on that? Because I think this is one of many areas where the details are somewhat thin on the ground. I'd also want to know what happens when the Citadel you have your orders hosted in is un-anchored, destroyed or has it's market service removed. Can I put up a Citadel, host up all my orders and then un-anchor my Citadel with the orders still persisting or will the orders get cancelled?
Rob Kaichin Empire Assault Corp Dead Terrorists 82	Posted - 2016.03.18 09:18:29 - [1257] - Quote The orders are cancelled: market orders count as coming from your personal hanger, so they're included in the asset safety mechanics. As for a quote, I thought it was in this thread, but it isn't. The essential idea was that there were problems implementing market visibility viz. the availability of docking rights. Therefore (for the moment), Citadels weren't able to buy outside themselves, nor sell. Think Outposts and Conquerable stations without the the market issues. If they are able to undercut markets (by creating 0% broker's fee buy orders), then the gig is up for NPC stations.
Bad Bobby Bring Me Sunshine In Tea We Trust 1327	Posted - 2016.03.18 09:31:28 - [1258] - Quote Rob Kaichin wrote: The orders are cancelled: market orders count as coming from your personal hanger, so they're included in the asset safety mechanics. As for a quote, I thought it was in this thread, but it isn't. So a station owner can take your broker fees, purge your orders and keep the ISK? What about corp orders that usually go to deliveries instead of your personal hanger? Rob Kaichin wrote: The essential idea was that there were problems implementing market visibility viz. the availability of docking rights. Therefore (for the moment), Citadels weren't able to buy outside themselves, nor sell. So is this a temporary thing, like the lack of contracts support, or a permanent thing?
Rob Kaichin Empire Assault Corp Dead Terrorists 82	Posted - 2016.03.18 09:47:59 - [1259] - Quote You're treating me like an authority when only CCP is that :P. And, that depends where/when the broker's fee is paid. As far as I can tell, they should be able to do exactly that. However, that requires them to de-anchor the Citadel, so they lose the rigs. (And there's a risk to the Citadel too!) I believe Corp Hangers and orders are protected by Asset Safety too. As for the market visibility problems, who knows? I think it might be permanent, but I can't really say.
Lucas Kell Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance 7408	Posted - 2016.03.18 10:24:17 - [1260] - Quote Bad Bobby wrote: Those look like perfectly sensible criteria. Why were broker fees not a criteria in your selection? Brokers fees are pretty much irrelevant at their current level even without standings, especially when seeding a market outside of mainland highsec, but standings themselves can be gathered for any corporation/faction so there was no real difference between them. Most stations were Gallente and I had Gellente standing. I went with a Quafe station in the end just because Quafe is cool. Bad Bobby wrote: Indeed. It's something I've depended on for some of my trading strategies. But in the past the gap between the haves and the have-nots wasn't nearly as big as is proposed, I'm wondering how that will impact who can access various types of trading gameplay. I imagine it will be restrictive, but I see that as a good thing. Trading is very low risk, very high reward and easy to do. I welcome any changes which add risk or cost to it. I'd like to see the zero fee for asset recovery to stations in system removed if the citadel is reinforced or destroyed too, because as it stands people who aren't the owner don't need to worry about losing a percentages of their stored assets. It would be good for that to change so they have a vested interest without. It should still be a zero fee if the citadel is untouched to stop owners trolling other players. Bad Bobby wrote: So a station owner can take your broker fees, purge your orders and keep the ISK? Yup, see what I was saying about added risk? It wouldn't make sense for a citadel owner to do really though as they've already made some isk and stand to make more by leaving it up. It would only make sense if the fees made less than the fuel and they had no other use for it, in which case it's not a substantial loss to the trader. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

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

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.