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) |

Kefevs Pirkibo
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 20:55:38 -
[151] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Hello people, Team Game of Drones is having a look at the Citadel structures services (reprocessing, clones, market, compression, offices) and we would like to make a few changes that will impact NPC taxes. The goal of such changes is to give more flexibility for Citadel owners to make a profit when charging their services to the public, while making sure they are profitable enough to compete versus NPC station services.
***
- Jump Clones: current price for installing jump clones in NPC stations is around 100,000 ISK. We are planning to increase that amount to 5m ISK to install a jump clone in NPC stations. That price will also be payable anytime a clone is left behind in a NPC station - so, if you jump clone away from a NPC station from previously established jump clones you will still pay that price. Jump Clones installed in Citadels will not have any NPC taxes, but the owner can charge his own pricing for the service. We also want to remove the maximum limit of jump clones for Citadels: like Citadel offices, your alliance, corporation or public customers will never be denied usage of this service if you grant them access in the first place.
***
Please remember those are still work in progress changes (especially the market broker's fee tax amount), so please use constructive feedback in your replies.
Bureaucracy is increasing in New Eden and increased cost of Jump Clone usage is one sign of this. With the notorious paperwork there should also be a form for receipt of this cost possible to forward for reimbursement. For NPSI communities fighting the big alliances one whale at a time it is important to muster enough pilots. A cost increase in Jump Clone usage will be possible to reimbursement from the loot of the careless big alliance pilots. A receipt mechanic would be necessary, keep in mind that NPSI communities don't have access to API keys like the major corporations/alliances. A receipt would be necessary so as to not pay every fleet member the Jump Clone cost, but only those that actually used a Jump Clone for that particular fleet.
Or you could just scrub the Jump Clone cost increase.
|

Scotsman Howard
The Scope Gallente Federation
46
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 21:03:20 -
[152] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:windows vista wrote:Contracts: while Contracts will not be available in Citadels for the first release,
i think that thist is more important what about my contracts for doctrine ships? open ship fitting from corp fittings. 'buy all' inside the citadel where your glorious logistics bros have seeded the market.
Yes: This makes sense.
Let us take a simple contract and make the person put up a minimum of 9 sell orders (ship, fittings, ammo, etc.).
Then let us take those 9 sell orders and make them visible to everyone in the region (because that is how the market in Eve works).
Then let the invaders or attackers go through and buy out the market (because again that is how the market in Eve works).
Guess what? Can you see the problem yet?
Now you have no doctrine ships for your pilots to fly.
Don't think this will happen? Why do you think people started using contracts in the first place? |

Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
2384
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 21:05:37 -
[153] - Quote
MachineOfLovingGrace wrote: Currently I can let the big boys play in null and do my own thing in high/low. I'd really really hate to be forced into space politics and big block shenanigans. Please think about why you want to do this, do you just want eve to be a more realistic, evil, grittier place, or do you really think this will improve gamplay as a whole? Just because a feature is cool and interesting and more sandboxy doesn't make it good for the game.
You have a funny view of how nullsec works. I am part of the largest bloc in the game, and I don't have to deal with space politics and shenanigans, or do anything in particular.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|

Lugh Crow-Slave
1643
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 21:09:43 -
[154] - Quote
Scotsman Howard wrote:Dave Stark wrote:windows vista wrote:Contracts: while Contracts will not be available in Citadels for the first release,
i think that thist is more important what about my contracts for doctrine ships? open ship fitting from corp fittings. 'buy all' inside the citadel where your glorious logistics bros have seeded the market. Yes: This makes sense. Let us take a simple contract and make the person put up a minimum of 9 sell orders (ship, fittings, ammo, etc.). Then let us take those 9 sell orders and make them visible to everyone in the region (because that is how the market in Eve works). Then let the invaders or attackers go through and buy out the market (because again that is how the market in Eve works). Guess what? Can you see the problem yet? Now you have no doctrine ships for your pilots to fly. Don't think this will happen? Why do you think people started using contracts in the first place?
It's just the initial release they will be added to citadels once they can be
Citadel worm hole tax
|

Hahnide Kragomn
Iota Piscium
1
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 21:12:05 -
[155] - Quote
I wonder how this will affect FW space. In particular upgrading FW systems will reduce broker fees, which is not very useful right now with the fees being low anyway.
I wonder if the citadel rates will be affected by FW system bonuses.
It will be interesting to see if someone builds a citadel in a FW system without docking restrictions but with hefty fees. Kind of a neutral station. |

Rob Kashuken
Dropbears Anonymous Friendly Probes
82
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 21:15:57 -
[156] - Quote
Please rethink the 5m isk fee for using a jumpclone. Installation of JC's, fine, but please do not create dis-incentives from getting people who are new into pvp.
With the market transaction fees - perhaps I missed it, but do the relevant market related skills & standings not reduce the fees anymore? Whilst I'm fully confident that the market will just rebalance after a short-term period of liquidity destabilization, I'm curious as to why the decision was made that will benefit powerblocs (by reaping additional taxes), but again, will effectually punish someone just getting into industry who is using NPC stations to manufacture / sell in.
If you're wanting to make citadels more attractive, why introduce barriers into the rest of Eve in order to do so? |

Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
2384
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 21:16:58 -
[157] - Quote
Deck Cadelanne wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Jump Clones: current price for installing jump clones in NPC stations is around 100,000 ISK. We are planning to increase that amount to 5m ISK to install a jump clone in NPC stations. That price will also be payable anytime a clone is left behind in a NPC station - so, if you jump clone away from a NPC station from previously established jump clones you will still pay that price. Jump Clones installed in Citadels will not have any NPC taxes, but the owner can charge his own pricing for the service. We also want to remove the maximum limit of jump clones for Citadels: like Citadel offices, your alliance, corporation or public customers will never be denied usage of this service if you grant them access in the first place.
5 million isk every time you *use* a jump clone at an NPC station? That's 10 million if you happen to be jumping from one NPC station to another? When you already have the cost of a 24 hour timer? Clearly you intend to force players into player corps/alliances and force them to use player owned structures for basic services. Clearly you have not looked at the "unintended consequences." I'll be very narrow in my take on this: This will make nullsec PVP even more the exclusive preserve of the big blue doughnut crowd. May as well put up a big, bright "Newbies not welcome" sign. It will probably also leave NPC null basically a deserted wasteland, as if it isn't non-viable enough already. Maybe incentives work better than arbitrary punishments, no? You can use someone else's citadel, without having to belong to their corporation or alliance.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|

Aaril
Interstellar Consulting Group
30
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 21:30:52 -
[158] - Quote
Instead of nerfing the game, why don't you lower the fuel cost of the clone service that is not even released yet? The initial contract at 5M is fine, but there should be no fee for jumping.
There will NEVER be a market to compete with NPC stations that is able to deny entry or be destroyed. Citadel owners can increase taxes, block access, and the Citadel can be destroyed. Even if the market goods are not destroyed along with a Citadel, a massive amount of goods would then need to be hauled to a new Citadel or station, and then have broker's fees applied once again. The unpredictable nature of players will mean that Citadel markets will primarily be used in WHs and Null for specific alliances. The proposed taxes are utterly insane, and will do nothing other than nerf an entire playstyle. Station traders will have to widen the margins so far apart that people will no longer even sell into buy orders. How about you just leave this alone? Station trading is not overpowered. No one forces someone to sell into buy orders.
The 100000 ISK for JCs is a flat number and is fine to increase. The markets work off of a percentage already, and should not be touched.
In general I sit by during changes and do not complain, but some of these changes have me absolutely baffled.
The irony here is that they are nerfing trading, which is one of the few ways in this game ti earn ISK that already combats inflation (taxes). It purely transfers ISK. Most other ways of earning ISK have the effect of increasing total ISK. As in, instead of wasting my time trading, I may start missioning, which only increases inflation through new ISK (or ratting/sleepers). |

Circumstantial Evidence
260
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 22:00:31 -
[159] - Quote
"To create an environment more competitive for Citadels, we plan on increasing the transaction tax to 2.5% [....] Players trading in citadels will still receive the transaction tax, but the broker's fee will be at the complete discretion of the owner. "
I don't understand how raising the transaction tax everywhere, w/o the possibility of reduction by using a Citadel market service - makes Citadels more competitive. |

PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders Northern Army
2735
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 22:06:33 -
[160] - Quote
Also, if the idea behind increasing the tax is to decentralize market hubs like Jita, Amarr, or Dodixie, the tax increase will have the opposite effect.
Specifically: Stocking a far flung market - as in the less trafficked parts of empire space like Agil - will become less tenable. A small, slow moving market where your orders might never completely fill/sell becomes completely undesirable when you bump taxes up by 6%.
All your doing is making the content enablers of eve, the people seeding markets near and far, more likely to go to a station where their stock will sell.
And again: no one will put trillions of assets on sale in a citadel where trade fees are arbitrarily set by players, that can be reinforced, un-anchored, or destroyed. It just doesn't make any financial sense to ever do this.
Putting the two points above together, you're going to end up centralizing the hisec markets more, not less. |
|

Lugh Crow-Slave
1645
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 22:19:29 -
[161] - Quote
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:"To create an environment more competitive for Citadels, we plan on increasing the transaction tax to 2.5% [....] Players trading in citadels will still receive the transaction tax, but the broker's fee will be at the complete discretion of the owner. "
I don't understand how raising the transaction tax everywhere, w/o the possibility of reduction by using a Citadel market service - makes Citadels more competitive.
The market rig reduces the transaction tax fire citadels
Citadel worm hole tax
|

Thebriwan
LUX Uls Xystus
232
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 22:28:40 -
[162] - Quote
The proposed changes look interesting and I have only one objection:
I think the broker fee for NPC stations would be to high.
There should be incentive to build an maintain citadels even in highsec - I see that. If one would try to create a market hub - free docking for everyone, with taxes on selling - I very much like that. BUT. There is a much greater risk in using that hub. The structure can be put down, the market can be closed on the whim of the owner. Or specially You or I can be suddenly excluded.
That needs to be balanced. Ok.
But 5 - 6 % broker fee? This would be more than the margin on many items.
If anyone can make a Citadel in or near Jita work, even 0.1 % as a broker fee would make them very very rich. There is no need to cut off the NPC station hugging margins trader from their profits.
I think that there is absolutely no need to make the NPC station broker fee higher. |

Deck Cadelanne
CAStabouts
278
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 22:31:28 -
[163] - Quote
Querns wrote: You can use someone else's citadel, without having to belong to their corporation or alliance.
Only if they let you.
Odds of that happening?
Pretty close to zero. Like anybody is going to pay for and take the risk of continuing to pay for a citadel just to let the bad guys use it.
This will kill casual/newbro PVP dead and probably empty out a lot of lowsec and NPC null as well. Won't effect the big sov null blobs at all.
EDIT: Except for making their space even more secure, that is.
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn professional."
- Hunter S. Thompson
|

Circumstantial Evidence
260
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 22:33:47 -
[164] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Circumstantial Evidence wrote:I don't understand how raising the transaction tax everywhere, w/o the possibility of reduction by using a Citadel market service - makes Citadels more competitive. The market rig reduces the transaction tax fire citadels Thx - missed that. We will face interesting tradeoffs in rigging choices. |

Lugh Crow-Slave
1645
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 22:43:24 -
[165] - Quote
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Circumstantial Evidence wrote:I don't understand how raising the transaction tax everywhere, w/o the possibility of reduction by using a Citadel market service - makes Citadels more competitive. The market rig reduces the transaction tax fire citadels Thx - missed that. We will face interesting tradeoffs in rigging choices. Yep and remember bonuses change depending on arc statuary (higher bonuses in low/null than in high)
Citadel worm hole tax
|

Xandor M
Crystal Throne
2
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 23:00:07 -
[166] - Quote
I'm sorry CCP, but the 7.5% - 8.5% base taxes and fees are a terrible idea. As a trader, there's no way i'm going to use a citadel for trading, between the taxes/fees, risk of the citadel being destroyed, risk of being locked out, etc... What this will do is cause people who trade passively to find new professions, some will turn to mission running, others to wormholes, most will choose a profession that brings new isk into the economy (bounties, sleeper loot, etc...) rather than circulating the existing isk.
Secondly, the 5m per clone jump is a bit extreme, I could see 1m as alliances tend to jump clone a lot. Have it scale somehow depending on how recently you jumped, or how many clones you have, or how far you're jumping.
I don't think the solution to inflation in eve is by increasing isk sinks, I believe reducing the faucets would be better, reduce bounties and mission payouts, increase lp and loot, reduce the buy price of npc buy orders (sleeper loot, etc...) |

Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
2384
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 23:07:43 -
[167] - Quote
Deck Cadelanne wrote:Querns wrote: You can use someone else's citadel, without having to belong to their corporation or alliance.
Only if they let you. Odds of that happening? Pretty close to zero. Like anybody is going to pay for and take the risk of continuing to pay for a citadel just to let the bad guys use it. This will kill casual/newbro PVP dead and probably empty out a lot of lowsec and NPC null as well. Won't effect the big sov null blobs at all. EDIT: Except for making their space even more secure, that is. You don't think people will make free-for-all docking citadels in empire, especially with the prospect of being able to reap tax income from them? If you think they won't exist, you're nuts.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|

Vibiana
Frontier Trading Company
42
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 23:08:33 -
[168] - Quote
Situation:
I'm putting my 3 month sell order in citadel
Owner rises sell tax to 100%. Buys my stuff, gets his isk back with the tax.
me -> no items, no isk.
owner -> items and isk.
Until you install the means to prevent that fraud, I will stay away from any investments in player-owned market places. |

Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2988
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 23:08:54 -
[169] - Quote
Querns wrote:Deck Cadelanne wrote:Querns wrote: You can use someone else's citadel, without having to belong to their corporation or alliance.
Only if they let you. Odds of that happening? Pretty close to zero. Like anybody is going to pay for and take the risk of continuing to pay for a citadel just to let the bad guys use it. This will kill casual/newbro PVP dead and probably empty out a lot of lowsec and NPC null as well. Won't effect the big sov null blobs at all. EDIT: Except for making their space even more secure, that is. You don't think people will make free-for-all docking citadels in empire, especially with the prospect of being able to reap tax income from them? If you think they won't exist, you're nuts. Dibs on niarja/uedama |

Solaris Vex
SniggWaffe WAFFLES.
9
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 23:10:10 -
[170] - Quote
The new tax rates are a massive ISK sink. Will there be a new ISK fountain to compensate? Or is inflation really that bad? |
|

Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2988
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 23:13:31 -
[171] - Quote
Vibiana wrote:Situation:
I'm putting my 3 month sell order in citadel
Owner rises sell tax to 100%. Buys my stuff, gets his isk back with the tax.
me -> no items, no isk.
owner -> items and isk.
Until you install the means to prevent that fraud, I will stay away from any investments in player-owned market places. Pretty sure that's not how taxes work. |

Matthew
BloodStar Technologies
19
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 23:19:21 -
[172] - Quote
Vibiana wrote:Situation:
I'm putting my 3 month sell order in citadel
Owner rises sell tax to 100%. Buys my stuff, gets his isk back with the tax.
me -> no items, no isk.
owner -> items and isk.
Until you install the means to prevent that fraud, I will stay away from any investments in player-owned market places.
That would be why the citadel owner is only able to adjust the broker fee, which is paid when you place the order.
What you describe would only apply if the citadel owner could adjust the transaction tax, which they cannot in these proposals.
|

Moac Tor
Cyber Core Stain Confederation
448
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 23:21:14 -
[173] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Charles Surge wrote:5M to JC is too high.
It is an incentive not to JC, and thus +1 incentive not to play the game. Agreed. This is a tax on PvP whereas the other fees are a tax on profitable activities. Profit taxes are good, PvP tax is bad. I think that the ability to stack jump clones in the same structure (vs just one now) is adequate incentive. The current system is a real pain. It is only 5 million ISK to teleport across the entire map; stop complaining scrubs.
I am in favour of creating a more interesting playing field when it comes to market hubs, but you are doing it wrong by simply offering massive bonuses to anyone using a citadel.
To make things interesting it should be based upon security status of the system also. As I and a couple of others mentioned; a lower security status should also the lower the broker fee.
This would offer some counterbalance and incentive to setting up hubs in low sec and below and make trading a lot more interesting.
Modulated ECM Effects
An Alternative to Skill Trading
|

Vic Jefferson
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
915
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 23:22:50 -
[174] - Quote
Querns wrote:You don't think people will make free-for-all docking citadels in empire, especially with the prospect of being able to reap tax income from them? If you think they won't exist, you're nuts.
GSF used to be the good guys, fighting the evil empire, now they are the bad guys. If the CFC opened up a 0% tax citadel in or around Jita, and kept it that way for months, then jacked the taxes up to just under the NPC orders, while simultaneously deccing all other competitors citadels, while potentially a smart play, this just lets people have too much power.
When AegisSov Hit, many players threw up their hands and said, Sov isn't worth it, let's go to LowSec. They were and are right in lots of ways; the isk is terrible, there's risk and maintenance, and there's no fights. People are going to be similarly affected when just keeping supplied is too much of a hassle. On paper this may be an attempt to add more sinks while also de-centralizing the market, which while both potentially good things, you could just as easily alter faucets (big need to do this) or add more NPC stations in key spots that would become sub-hubs.
I am sorry but this game play is forced, and in a bad way. You want to enable players and small groups, and these changes do the opposite.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM XI
|

Align Planet1
Cauldron-Born Legion The Cauldron-Born
92
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 23:29:01 -
[175] - Quote
I guess this means the wardec mechanics are getting another look soon.
Or, if that's not the plan, it soon will be. Otherwise, everything is going to be dramatically more expensive for no pay-off. |

Vic Jefferson
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
915
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 23:30:01 -
[176] - Quote
Moac Tor wrote:]It is only 5 million ISK to teleport across the entire map; stop complaining scrubs.
Per character, per jump. Moving around is a key part of the game now due to how far and between content is. The faster and easier it is to get to content, the better experiences players have, and the more the wheels of the economy are greased, which in turn is more content for people. It will add up a lot faster than you think, and is just another straw on an increasingly burdened back.
Everyone of these proposed changes is harmful to players and small entities.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM XI
|

Katarina Reid
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
482
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 23:31:20 -
[177] - Quote
5mil to change implants is to much. Should make it if you jump to a clone in same station its free and no cooldown. |

Moac Tor
Cyber Core Stain Confederation
448
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 23:40:08 -
[178] - Quote
Vic Jefferson wrote:Moac Tor wrote:It is only 5 million ISK to teleport across the entire map; stop complaining scrubs. Per character, per jump. Moving around is a key part of the game now due to how far and between content is. The faster and easier it is to get to content, the better experiences players have, and the more the wheels of the economy are greased, which in turn is more content for people. It will add up a lot faster than you think, and is just another straw on an increasingly burdened back. Everyone of these proposed changes is harmful to players and small entities. So it is not good because it doesn't allow players instant gratification and means their choices have consequences... I guess I can't blame you as it seems to be the path eve has been following lately.
Modulated ECM Effects
An Alternative to Skill Trading
|

Niko Zino
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
20
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 23:49:43 -
[179] - Quote
Moac Tor wrote:So it is not good because it doesn't allow players instant gratification and means their choices have consequences... I guess I can't blame you as it seems to be the path eve has been following lately.
Heaven knows Vic and I aren't always on the same side of every issue, but seriously, you should read what he writes before typing.
5M to a veteran is of no consequence. Free for newbie who happens to be in a corp that has a Citadel with JC bay where he wants to be is of no consequence.
If you aren't in either of these cases, as is the case for most 'unaligned' PvP newbie friendly groups, you have to pay 10M for the right to try something new.
Not a lot of ISK, you'll tell me, that's absolutely true. But for someone who has to be convinced in the first place that change is a good thing, adding 'oh and you have to pay extra just to try' just doesn't help
CAS, the NPC Corp that Does StuffGäó
|

Lugh Crow-Slave
1645
|
Posted - 2016.03.03 23:50:17 -
[180] - Quote
Vic Jefferson wrote:Moac Tor wrote:]It is only 5 million ISK to teleport across the entire map; stop complaining scrubs. Per character, per jump. Moving around is a key part of the game now due to how far and between content is. The faster and easier it is to get to content, the better experiences players have, and the more the wheels of the economy are greased, which in turn is more content for people. It will add up a lot faster than you think, and is just another straw on an increasingly burdened back. Everyone of these proposed changes is harmful to players and small entities.
Not my fault if you live to far away from content maybe try dropping a few blues
Citadel worm hole tax
|
|
|
|
|
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 |