EVE Search - Proposed: the Concord Tax

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Proposed: the Concord Tax

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Dave Davies	Posted - 2008.08.26 04:33:00 - [1] Ruze managed to pull this one out of his butt a couple days ago and I can't believe he didn't make a thread for it... so here it is. If it takes off I guess somebody can post it in the CSM forum but I figured I'd float it here first. The perceived problem: high sec pays too much. The natural activity of the market has made high sec ores more valuable than low- sec ores, and high sec mission running is lucrative enough that it allegedly attracts plenty of players (or their alts) from allegedly more valuable space. The last issue can be balanced by CCP intervention, the first probably shouldn't be -- or at least not directly. The proposed solution: tax incentives. In Real Life(tm) tax incentives are used by governments the world over to encourage all sorts of behavior, and CCP could probably use the same method to encourage activity in lawless space. But of course in order to offer a tax break you first have to implement a tax. Enter the Concord Tax (or, if you like titles, call it the Law Enforcement Funding Accord of the Second Yulai Convention -- lol). The Concord Tax would be a 15% tax leveed on all mission rewards and pirate bounties paid out in systems where Concord operates, as well as on all minerals refined in those same systems. Maybe there could be a skill that reduces (but doesn't eliminate) the Concord Tax, but not Accounting -- IMO it would need to be something like a Rank 8 trade skill that required a certain level of Corp Management as a prerequisite in addition to the usual Trade prereqs. The probable benefit of such a system is that it would make low sec activities inherently more valuable than the same activities in high sec, including mining (or at least refining) low- end ores; furthermore it would achieve that benefit without needing to shuffle agents around, adjust loot tables, rework ore distribution or any other hamfisted adjustments to basic game mechanics. In gameplay terms players could remain in high sec for a hassle- free but reduced income while it would actually be worthwhile (for a change!) for more ambitious players to pool their resources and try to tackle low sec. Comments/ flames/ arguments/ polemics anybody? I thought it was a decent solution myself. ----- Pop Quiz ----- Can you tell me what's wrong with this sentence.
Kyle Klanen	Posted - 2008.08.26 04:37:00 - [2] A system of increasing rates of NPC corp tax would be better 3 months = no tax, 6 months 5% tax, 9 months 15% tax and so on.
Dave Davies	Posted - 2008.08.26 04:38:00 - [3] Originally by: Kyle Klanen A system of increasing rates of NPC corp tax would be better 3 months = no tax, 6 months 5% tax, 9 months 15% tax and so on. That's obviously worth talking about as well and I'd support it, but it's a different issue. Yours: people stay in NPC corps too long. Mine: high sec is too valuable. ----- Pop Quiz ----- Can you tell me what's wrong with this sentence.
Kyle Klanen	Posted - 2008.08.26 04:43:00 - [4] Originally by: Dave Davies Originally by: Kyle Klanen A system of increasing rates of NPC corp tax would be better 3 months = no tax, 6 months 5% tax, 9 months 15% tax and so on. That's obviously worth talking about as well and I'd support it, but it's a different issue. Yours: people stay in NPC corps too long. Mine: high sec is too valuable. True its a little off topic but a concord tax just complicates the issue with mechanics and other stuff when the mission rewards and ore yeilds in high sec could just be reduced by 15%.
Dave Davies	Posted - 2008.08.26 04:47:00 - [5] Edited by: Dave Davies on 26/08/2008 04:46:44 Originally by: Kyle Klanen True its a little off topic but a concord tax just complicates the issue with mechanics and other stuff when the mission rewards and ore yeilds in high sec could just be reduced by 15%. Missioning could just get a simple nerf, it's true. Mining however, not so much. Mineral prices respond to things CCP does (like introduction of new ships, modification of drone loot tables etc etc) but are essentially the product of raw supply and demand and as such tend to fluctuate. Getting CCP to adjust ore yields every time supply and demand changes is pretty inefficient; adding an extra refine tax only in high sec ensures that there's added value in low sec mining regardless of the state of the market. ----- Pop Quiz ----- Can you tell me what's wrong with this sentence.
Xioden Acap Lightspeed Enterprises Burning Horizons	Posted - 2008.08.26 04:57:00 - [6] Quote: The perceived problem Right there is the key word in this post I think. Did you seriously think this through 100%? It won't do anything more than get a small handful of people into low sec, and you can probably assume a good number of them won't stick around after they've lost ships and the "added reward of low sec" isn't justified at all by the added risk. So you'll have people earning 15% less, and due to refine tax, things will cost roughly 15% more. So now it takes longer to get the same things as before, so your going to have even less people willing to go try and leave high sec for kicks and giggles, at the very least they'll be doing it less often since they aren't as able to recoup their losses as quickly.
Dirk Magnum Spearhead Endeavors	Posted - 2008.08.26 05:06:00 - [7] 99% corporate tax in NPC corps. Permanently move a large quantity of High Sec ore out of High Sec. And then on top of that do what the OP suggests.
Dave Davies	Posted - 2008.08.26 05:17:00 - [8] Originally by: Xioden Acap Quote: The perceived problem Right there is the key word in this post I think. Yeah, that was generous of me wasn't it? Just for the record, I'm by far not the only one thinking this. Quote: It won't do anything more than get a small handful of people into low sec, and you can probably assume a good number of them won't stick around after they've lost ships and the "added reward of low sec" isn't justified at all by the added risk. Believe it or not there are mining corps working low sec right now. Most of them only do it for grins though as it's hard to make it pay. If it was easier to make it pay then yeah, they'd be out there with a little more zeal. If it was easier to make it pay I'd be out there, in fact. Got locations scouted out, corpmates that would like to do it, the whole nine; I can't currently justify it though because business- wise it makes zero sense. OTOH you go to the S+I forums and you'll get guys e-peening about how they spent weeks training up Exhumers V for a measly 3% -- if you think those guys wouldn't try playing Let's Make A Deal with a pvp corp for 15% then I think you're thinking wrong. Quote: So you'll have people earning 15% less, and due to refine tax, things will cost roughly 15% more. So now it takes longer to get the same things as before, so your going to have even less people willing to go try and leave high sec for kicks and giggles, at the very least they'll be doing it less often since they aren't as able to recoup their losses as quickly. You might have fewer solo people going out there to play PvP for a day. You'll have the same number of idiots going out there trying to mine Jaspet in an Osprey as you do now. And I'm confident you'll also have more ambitious corps going out there to pursue Mammon -- which is what you want a lot more than day trippers to begin with, since ISK being at stake is how the game gets interesting. ----- Pop Quiz ----- Can you tell me what's wrong with this sentence.
Piper Halliwell Minmatar Phantom Squad G00DFELLAS	Posted - 2008.08.26 05:21:00 - [9] Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 26/08/2008 05:08:56 99% corporate tax in NPC corps. Permanently move a large quantity of High Sec ore out of High Sec. And then on top of that do what the OP suggests. Slash and burn tbh. If they did that, then you couldn't scan out mission runners with your alt and warp to yourself and grief miners and such....you would have nothing to do anymore. -------------------- You've got a gun, I've got a gun, Let's write a tragic ending.
Dirk Magnum Spearhead Endeavors	Posted - 2008.08.26 05:26:00 - [10] Originally by: Piper Halliwell Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 26/08/2008 05:08:56 99% corporate tax in NPC corps. Permanently move a large quantity of High Sec ore out of High Sec. And then on top of that do what the OP suggests. Slash and burn tbh. If they did that, then you couldn't scan out mission runners with your alt and warp to yourself and grief miners and such....you would have nothing to do anymore. It'd be business as usual for that type of thing, except you'll find fewer people to do it to in High Sec.
techzer0 Minmatar Mafia	Posted - 2008.08.26 05:38:00 - [11] Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 26/08/2008 05:08:56 99% corporate tax in NPC corps. Permanently move a large quantity of High Sec ore out of High Sec. And then on top of that do what the OP suggests. Slash and burn tbh. Move the Ice. Kill the lvl 4 rewards in safe-space (I run 4s instead of ratting 0.0, less hassle, and I still disagree with it) etc etc... This is fun, more ideas to kill highsec ------------ CCP > Let's play the nerf a race game! Next up minmatar!
Soporo Caldari	Posted - 2008.08.26 05:45:00 - [12] Percieved... So nerf Empire to make another area more valluable?? Why not call for a boost to that area instead, eh? Oh that's right, your not interested in a boost, just more targets, amirite? Quote: The natural activity of the market has made high sec ores more valuable than low- sec ores Wrong, I think. LowSec ore USED to be better off. That is untill CCP, in their infinite wisdom, decided to nerf mining by adding a whole region of rats that dropped mid end minerals. Mining by guns FTL. Not to mention the usual tons of useless missioning drops being churned up AND more Drones. But hey, I'd be down with a total removal of all t1 non named low meta crap loot drops in lvl 3's and 4's. I'd also be down with all Drones giving bounties and no minerals. Posting in a Nerf everyone else to drive em into LowSec or just because thread.
Mankirks Wife	Posted - 2008.08.26 05:50:00 - [13] Edited by: Mankirks Wife on 26/08/2008 05:51:05 Meh It doesn't matter what you do to highsec, lowsec will always be a (comparatively) barren wasteland, except for FW fleets which most pirates don't want to deal with. Tax NPC corps? OK.. now you have a million one-man corps. Nerf rewards a bunch? People will quit or join big 0.0 alliances (because they know pirates for the most part won't deal with blobs, bubbles, and other 0.0 hassles) Move ice out of highsec? Well, that'll get rid of most of the macros, but it'll also get rid of any research POS in highsec that's not being operated by a 0.0 alliance - nobody is going to mine ice in lowsec when they can mine better ice with a much higher degree of safety in 0.0. Less researched BPOs will mean less competition which will mean higher prices. Move ores out of highsec? Same thing - people will mine them in 0.0. Now you have to pay shipping costs to jump all the mins out, as well as less people mining, less minerals, higher prices. Now, I'm not saying there's no problem - obviously lowsec being relatively barren except for huge FW fleets and hungry pirates is a problem, but nerfing highsec is not the answer. ---
Verx Interis Amarr Aurora Security Cosmic Anomalies	Posted - 2008.08.26 05:52:00 - [14] Taxing someone a lot of money if they're over 3 months old and in an NPC corp is something I thought of but never said much about. Originally by: Rawr Cristina (dreadnoughts are also possibly the most boring ship you could fly. It's like mining, without the part where you make money)
techzer0 Minmatar Mafia	Posted - 2008.08.26 05:54:00 - [15] Originally by: Soporo Percieved... So nerf Empire to make another area more valluable?? Why not call for a boost to that area instead, eh? Oh that's right, your not interested in a boost, just more targets, amirite? Nullsec is fine tbh. It's sad to me that I can sit in highsec perfectly safe and make more money than in 0.0 as I don't have to deal with roaming gangs and afk cloakers. I can even grief the bears a little bit when they're dumb enough to aggro me in highsec. Lowsec on the other hand only rewards PVP, there is not much reason to go there since as you said, CCP in all their wisdom made the Drone regions. Then of course... there are the same quality agents that you can find in perfectly safe space, albeit laggy, but perfectly safe. So no reason there. So yes, I'd much rather see highsec nerfed than see lowsec/0.0 buffed to be more valuable. ------------ CCP > Let's play the nerf a race game! Next up minmatar!
Dave Davies	Posted - 2008.08.26 05:55:00 - [16] Originally by: Soporo Percieved... So nerf Empire to make another area more valluable?? Why not call for a boost to that area instead, eh? Oh that's right, your not interested in a boost, just more targets, amirite? No, you are not "rite" and neither are you right for that matter. I'm as carebear as they come: I live in high sec, I'm training an invention alt, I've got a spreadsheet for my manufacturing sales and I run my own supply chain; I run missions, I live in high sec and so far I've racked up zero player kills. Sad, I know, but there it is and nothing lasts forever. The reason I want high sec nerfed instead of low sec boosted is that honestly it just seems too easy to get ahead in high sec. Quote: The natural activity of the market has made high sec ores more valuable than low- sec ores Wrong, I think. LowSec ore USED to be better off. That is untill CCP, in their infinite wisdom, decided to nerf mining by adding a whole region of rats that dropped mid end minerals. Mining by guns FTL. Not to mention the usual tons of useless missioning drops being churned up AND more Drones. Yeah, drone regions. Either way though, as it stands the taxing high sec would guaranteed make low sec more valuable than high sec without unintended consequences/ butterfly effect/ whatever. Quote: Posting in a Nerf everyone else to drive em into LowSec or just because thread. You're just the man of a million memes aren't you? ----- Pop Quiz ----- Can you tell me what's wrong with this sentence.
Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2008.08.26 05:58:00 - [17] Check out the "what's your best pirate loot" thread and then tell that high-sec pays too much My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.
Xioden Acap Lightspeed Enterprises Burning Horizons	Posted - 2008.08.26 06:02:00 - [18] Originally by: Dave Davies Originally by: Xioden Acap Quote: The perceived problem Right there is the key word in this post I think. Yeah, that was generous of me wasn't it? Just for the record, I'm by far not the only one thinking this. The few thinking of it are almost elusively the ones who don't make up that 90% who never leave high sec. Quote: Quote: It won't do anything more than get a small handful of people into low sec, and you can probably assume a good number of them won't stick around after they've lost ships and the "added reward of low sec" isn't justified at all by the added risk. Believe it or not there are mining corps working low sec right now. Most of them only do it for grins though as it's hard to make it pay. If it was easier to make it pay then yeah, they'd be out there with a little more zeal. If it was easier to make it pay I'd be out there, in fact. Got locations scouted out, corp mates that would like to do it, the whole nine; I can't currently justify it though because business- wise it makes zero sense. Most wouldn't bother then either. Market factors will continue to decide the prices, which means it will still be more viable to mine in high sec. Then just spend an hour or so moving to and from low sec to refine. Guy to web/scout and if trouble arises freighter pulls a logoffski. 500k worth of ship risk to avoid the 15% CONCORD refine tax. Quote: OTOH you go to the S+I forums and you'll get guys e-peening about how they spent weeks training up Exhumers V for a measly 3% -- if you think those guys wouldn't try playing Let's Make A Deal with a pvp corp for 15% then I think you're thinking wrong. They're idiots if they make a deal with a pvp corp frankly, see above. Quote: Quote: So you'll have people earning 15% less, and due to refine tax, things will cost roughly 15% more. So now it takes longer to get the same things as before, so your going to have even less people willing to go try and leave high sec for kicks and giggles, at the very least they'll be doing it less often since they aren't as able to recoup their losses as quickly. You might have fewer solo people going out there to play PvP for a day. You'll have the same number of idiots going out there trying to mine Jaspet in an Osprey as you do now. And I'm confident you'll also have more ambitious corps going out there to pursue Mammon -- which is what you want a lot more than day trippers to begin with, since ISK being at stake is how the game gets interesting. So it boils down, once more, to pirates wanting easy kills to, as you put it earlier, "e-peen", when it comes to k/d ratio on their kill boards. Anyone who isn't an idiot padding some kill *****s kill count will be spending more time funding their pvp efforts, which makes it less accessible, which means less people out at any given time.
jrambox	Posted - 2008.08.26 06:09:00 - [19] Edited by: jrambox on 26/08/2008 06:10:27 HOW ABOUT THE OP PAYS ME HALF OF HIS INCOME AND SHUTS THE **** OFF. I happen to be a high sec player and I like it. Why should I be taxed by it. Why do you care if I make moneys in high sec? How does it affect your 0.0 life?
techzer0 Minmatar Mafia	Posted - 2008.08.26 06:15:00 - [20] Originally by: jrambox Edited by: jrambox on 26/08/2008 06:10:27 HOW ABOUT THE OP PAYS ME HALF OF HIS INCOME AND SHUTS THE ** OFF. I happen to be a high sec player and I like it. Why should I be taxed by it. Why do you care if I make moneys in high sec? How does it affect your 0.0 life? The replies in these "nerf highsec" threads are the only reason I love these threads so much. At least I can be civil while b**ing and moaning every time someone suggests nerfing my nano-ness ------------ CCP > Let's play the nerf a race game! Next up minmatar!
AleRiperKilt	Posted - 2008.08.26 06:17:00 - [21] Translation: Mommy, mommy, i suck so bad as a pirate I can't get any targets in lowsec. Tell CPP to nerf empire so I get more easy targets. Its too hard to hunt them right now because all the good pirates already killed them. --- "I live in Los Angeles, where driving is non-consensual pvp" - Arric Rohr
Dave Davies	Posted - 2008.08.26 06:17:00 - [22] Originally by: Xioden Acap Most wouldn't bother then either. Market factors will continue to decide the prices, which means it will still be more viable to mine in high sec. Then just spend an hour or so moving to and from low sec to refine. Guy to web/scout and if trouble arises freighter pulls a logoffski. 500k worth of ship risk to avoid the 15% CONCORD refine tax. WTB 500k ISK freighter plz. And yeah, people would do that: mine in high sec, refine in low sec. But ore takes up a lot of space and that could get to be a real hassle; not to mention it would attract pirates to the hotter spots in droves. All told it wouldn't be even close to as efficient as what you have right now. Quote: They're idiots if they make a deal with a pvp corp frankly, see above. Nah. That 15% cushion gives you a lot more wiggle room for making a deal AND it keeps you from having to be one of the lemmings we just described. Quote: So it boils down, once more, to pirates wanting easy kills to, as you put it earlier, "e-peen", when it comes to k/d ratio on their kill boards. No. Nein. Nyet. Non. This is entirely incorrect. This is more about how royally **ed off I'm going to be in a few more months if I discover that high sec is the industrial "end game," I couldn't give two farts who gets more kills. Quote: Anyone who isn't an idiot padding some kill ***s kill count will be spending more time funding their pvp efforts, which makes it less accessible, which means less people out at any given time. ... which will in turn make "ships + mods at cost, free ammo, 5-6% of the take and a big bait blob on the starmap" a much more attractive offer than it is right now. PvP corps willing to fly top cover get their operating expenses cut and industrial corps willing to organize for unsafe space can pay for it AND be more competitive than high sec- only corps... unlike what you have now. ----- Pop Quiz ----- Can you tell me what's wrong with this sentence.
FlameGlow Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.26 06:18:00 - [23] Modify drone alloys to refine into trit and moon minerals only -> lowsec minerals become more valuable, veldspar prices drop, many T2 stuffs become cheaper. _____________ I don't care what is nerfed, as long as it's not my "undock" button.
Dave Davies	Posted - 2008.08.26 06:18:00 - [24] Originally by: AleRiperKilt Translation: Mommy, mommy, i suck so bad as a pirate I can't get any targets in lowsec. Tell CPP to nerf empire so I get more easy targets. Its too hard to hunt them right now because all the good pirates already killed them. Come back when you finish up that remedial reading course, won't you? ----- Pop Quiz ----- Can you tell me what's wrong with this sentence.
Glengrant TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2008.08.26 06:21:00 - [25] Edited by: Glengrant on 26/08/2008 06:22:54 First you're trying to solve a non-problem and then you don't understand game design and player psychology. Taxing npc corps or forcing people out of it is useless. At best you force them into a zillion new player run mini-corps and at worst you drive them out of Eve. It's also a non-problem because why does it bother you in the first place that the majority of players prefers to hang around in empire? (no - I'm not among them - it simply doesn't bother me) Sometimes their reasons are faulty - but that doesn't matter - in doubt it's their problem not yours or mine. I find the whole idea of empire being low density pop and high sec crowded with people rather funny. It's true that many wait too long to go to 0-sec, but that's mostly because they are over-afraid of what's out there or have wrong pre-conceptions about the requirements. And why do so many people believe low sec has to become more popular? It's the convenient close to empire space where pirates try to catch uncautious noobs and gank them at gates. That's why it's not worth for most people to go there and I think it will always be that way - so don't worry about it. Many people actually like to do stuff like trading, mining and productions. [Shrug] - Again - why does that bother anybody? The reasons people don't go to low sec and beyond have only partly to do with isk. If that were all everybody who can count would already be out in 0.0 - because even if you're afraid of loosing ships - you make so much more money that you can afford to loose a lot of them. And CCP can't do many of the proposed "solutions" because "forcing" players out of the (relative) safety they want to have would only force them out of the game. The majority of people are in high pop density civilized empire space - exactly as one would expect when looking at the map. The brave and the foolhardy venture out into deep space. It would look rather silly the other way around. Also people would then whine about 0-sec being so crowded and not feeling like a frontier. And nobody in Jita to sell them new ships. --- ISK BUYER = LOOSER EVE TV- Bring it back!
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.26 06:22:00 - [26] Originally by: Dave Davies The Concord Tax would be a 15% tax leveed on all mission rewards and pirate bounties paid out in systems where Concord operates, as well as on all minerals refined in those same systems. Maybe there could be a skill that reduces (but doesn't eliminate) the Concord Tax, but not Accounting -- IMO it would need to be something like a Rank 8 trade skill that required a certain level of Corp Management as a prerequisite in addition to the usual Trade prereqs. High sec mining doesnt really need any nerf, and high sec missions need closer to 50% nerf in profitability. The tax idea fit better with npc corps to discourage people from staying there forever. Vote against the nano nerf!
Glengrant TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2008.08.26 06:25:00 - [27] Originally by: Dave Davies ----- Pop Quiz ----- Can you tell me what's wrong with this sentence. ? :-) --- ISK BUYER = LOOSER EVE TV- Bring it back!
Dave Davies	Posted - 2008.08.26 06:31:00 - [28] Originally by: Glengrant Originally by: Dave Davies ----- Pop Quiz ----- Can you tell me what's wrong with this sentence. ? :-) ... and Glengrant gets a gold star for today. ----- Pop Quiz ----- Can you tell me what's wrong with this sentence.
Furb Killer Gallente The first genesis Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2008.08.26 06:41:00 - [29] I allready disagree with lvl 4 nerf, but why would mining in high sec need a nerf? And then we got a high sec lvl 4 mission nerf. In your idea it is 2 parts: 1. Bounties, 2. ISK reward. Now wouldnt it be much easier to lower the bounties and rewards of high sec missions (and if you really want lower the base refining ammount in high sec), instead of adding an entire new game mechanic that does exactly the same?
jrambox	Posted - 2008.08.26 07:49:00 - [30] Originally by: techzer0 The replies in these "nerf highsec" threads are the only reason I love these threads so much. At least I can be civil while b**ing and moaning every time someone suggests nerfing my nano-ness Well I am done being civil. Week after week people come and make up some bullshit excuse to nerf highsec or something else that they dont like. Just play the **ing game. If you dont like it gtfo of eve.
TrulyKosh Gallente Solo for UNCLE	Posted - 2008.08.26 07:57:00 - [31] Originally by: Dave Davies The perceived problem: high sec pays too much. Then why don't you just go there and get the same isk income? This will eliminate all "too much"-arguments immediately without the need to change the game at all. Everyone gets the same income (give or take a few % for better negotiation skill), pure socialism. And the best part of it: noone is stopping you from doing it. There is no problem. There is not even a "perceived problem". There is just you and some others that think the same who want to change the game. It's absolutely fine that you and others voice your concerns and your wish to change the game, but please stop starting thread after thread after thread about a non-existing problem (and suggesting solutions for a non-exiting problem). It would be a problem if there were CCP- or player-generated unsurmountable obstacles in your way in order to obatin the same benefits that other players can get. Please name one.
Beltantis Torrence	Posted - 2008.08.26 08:07:00 - [32] Honestly, this strikes me as a bit too contrived and annoying just for the sake of being annoying. If you want to make low sec/null sec more profitable while simultaneously fixing possibly another problem maybe introduce a way to get T2 building materials without requiring moons. That'd fix two separate issues in one fell swoop rather than simply 'punishing people' for using Empire space (ultimately, nerfing Empire does little to nothing to improve your own economic situation).
Dave Davies	Posted - 2008.08.26 08:15:00 - [33] Originally by: TrulyKosh Then why don't you just go there and get the same isk income? I live there you non- thread- be- readin' motherscratcher. Also: Quote: It's absolutely fine that you and others voice your concerns and your wish to change the game, but please stop starting thread after thread after thread about a non-existing problem (and suggesting solutions for a non-exiting problem). It's OK for you to post but please stop posting. Thanks. ----- Pop Quiz ----- Can you tell me what's wrong with this sentence.
Karii Ildarian Caldari Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2008.08.26 08:25:00 - [34] Edited by: Karii Ildarian on 26/08/2008 08:30:19 Edited by: Karii Ildarian on 26/08/2008 08:29:21 Edited by: Karii Ildarian on 26/08/2008 08:27:22 Edited by: Karii Ildarian on 26/08/2008 08:26:14 Ok, I'll play, but the idea needs a bit of tweaking to make it equitable. Empire Tax Flat 15% on all wallet transactions for all members of Empire Player Corps having positive standings with the particular faction, in whose space such transactions ocur. This tax can be reduced by 1%/positive standing point achieved. Flat 15% on all wallet transactions for all members of NPC Corps. Duty Flat 15% additional duty rate applied to any wallet transactions for players with positive standings, but not in an Empire Player Corp or whose Player Corp does not have positive standings with the particular faction, in whose space such a transaction occurs. This duty can be reduced by 1%/positive standing point achieved. Risk Surcharge Players with security standing lower than 0.0 are given a risk surcharge of an additional 5%/negative standing point, to a maximum of 25% for -5.0 Players with security standings below -5.0 are criminals and cannot perform legal transactions within Empire Space and will be shot on sight. I'll vote for this.
Empyre Domestic Reform	Posted - 2008.08.26 08:28:00 - [35] Edited by: Empyre on 26/08/2008 08:34:28 Edited by: Empyre on 26/08/2008 08:28:30 Hey look. Another person who thinks they'll be exalted and revered for starting a clone thread of a duplicate topic and hiding it under.. /drum roll.. the same topic! Cheers, OP! You've won the redundant redundancy award. It's a mechanical hand that you mount to the back of your chair. It slaps you upside the back of the head every time you have an idea. Trust me, the world will be safer with this in place. PS. I'll explain it for you because I predict you're going to have a bit of trouble. Before your idea can have any merit, you have to first prove the first part, that high sec is indeed more profitable. I've personally proved it wrong at least twice on this very forum in the last two years or more. Destroy all that which is evil, so that which is good may flourish.
TrulyKosh Gallente Solo for UNCLE	Posted - 2008.08.26 08:34:00 - [36] Originally by: Karii Ildarian Edited by: Karii Ildarian on 26/08/2008 08:30:19 Edited by: Karii Ildarian on 26/08/2008 08:29:21 Edited by: Karii Ildarian on 26/08/2008 08:27:22 Edited by: Karii Ildarian on 26/08/2008 08:26:14 Risk Surcharge Players with security standing lower than 0.0 are given a risk surcharge of an additional 5%/negative standing point, to a maximum of 25% for -5.0 Players with security standings below -5.0 are criminals and cannot perform legal transactions within Empire Space and will be shot on sight. I'll vote for this. You would have to get rid of alts to make this work. I'd vote for that.
TrulyKosh Gallente Solo for UNCLE	Posted - 2008.08.26 08:41:00 - [37] Originally by: Dave Davies I live there you non- thread- be- readin' motherscratcher. And in 5 months in game, your sec status did not increase a single notch? Then post with your main
Shintai Gallente Balad Naran Orbital Shipyards	Posted - 2008.08.26 09:01:00 - [38] Originally by: Dave Davies Ruze managed to pull this one out of his butt a couple days ago and I can't believe he didn't make a thread for it... so here it is. If it takes off I guess somebody can post it in the CSM forum but I figured I'd float it here first. The perceived problem: high sec pays too much. The natural activity of the market has made high sec ores more valuable than low- sec ores, and high sec mission running is lucrative enough that it allegedly attracts plenty of players (or their alts) from allegedly more valuable space. The last issue can be balanced by CCP intervention, the first probably shouldn't be -- or at least not directly. The proposed solution: tax incentives. In Real Life(tm) tax incentives are used by governments the world over to encourage all sorts of behavior, and CCP could probably use the same method to encourage activity in lawless space. But of course in order to offer a tax break you first have to implement a tax. Enter the Concord Tax (or, if you like titles, call it the Law Enforcement Funding Accord of the Second Yulai Convention -- lol). The Concord Tax would be a 15% tax leveed on all mission rewards and pirate bounties paid out in systems where Concord operates, as well as on all minerals refined in those same systems. Maybe there could be a skill that reduces (but doesn't eliminate) the Concord Tax, but not Accounting -- IMO it would need to be something like a Rank 8 trade skill that required a certain level of Corp Management as a prerequisite in addition to the usual Trade prereqs. The probable benefit of such a system is that it would make low sec activities inherently more valuable than the same activities in high sec, including mining (or at least refining) low- end ores; furthermore it would achieve that benefit without needing to shuffle agents around, adjust loot tables, rework ore distribution or any other hamfisted adjustments to basic game mechanics. In gameplay terms players could remain in high sec for a hassle- free but reduced income while it would actually be worthwhile (for a change!) for more ambitious players to pool their resources and try to tackle low sec. Comments/ flames/ arguments/ polemics anybody? I thought it was a decent solution myself. Lets see...even if you made 0.0 and lowsec 10x more profitable...nobody would move besides maybe 1%. You overfished in lowsec. Blame yourself. Nerf highsec to 10% of what it is now, and you might get 1%. However, you will be the loser. Its you that gonna start paying 250million for a T1 battleship and T2? What T2...highsec runs the economy. And its actually for your own benefit. -------------------------------------- Abstraction and Transcendence: Nature, Shintai, and Geometry
Wet Ferret	Posted - 2008.08.26 09:15:00 - [39] All I would like to see is a more dynamic payout system where players get less if there are more players in the same area doing the same thing. Perhaps the effect of this could also be based on the number of nearby agents, so low-sec residents feel it less and null-sec players don't even notice. Not sure how this could be applied to mining / refining but that probably isn't needed and the last thing mining needs is a nerf anyway. I'm sure they could balance this so the change of payout changes slowly but gradually to adjust to the number of players successfully completing missions in an area. The main idea is that it is a boost to lesser used and lower quality agents while at the same time (hopefully) discouraging crowding. But, yeah. These forums seriously need some indicator that the post has ended and the sig has started.
Vaal Erit Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2008.08.26 09:26:00 - [40] While the idea is nice, I fail to see the urgent problem that this fixes. If this is adopted I feel little will change except for newbie corp people will make 15% less cash on mission bouties/rewards. At best a very small minority of people will leave Motsu, at best it will just be a big inconvenience to all mission runners. No to this. -- http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html
Schalac Caldari Apocalypse Reign	Posted - 2008.08.26 09:44:00 - [41] Originally by: Dave Davies Ruze managed to pull this one out of his butt a couple days ago and I can't believe he didn't make a thread for it... so here it is. If it takes off I guess somebody can post it in the CSM forum but I figured I'd float it here first. The perceived problem: high sec pays too much. The natural activity of the market has made high sec ores more valuable than low- sec ores, and high sec mission running is lucrative enough that it allegedly attracts plenty of players (or their alts) from allegedly more valuable space. The last issue can be balanced by CCP intervention, the first probably shouldn't be -- or at least not directly. The proposed solution: tax incentives. In Real Life(tm) tax incentives are used by governments the world over to encourage all sorts of behavior, and CCP could probably use the same method to encourage activity in lawless space. But of course in order to offer a tax break you first have to implement a tax. Enter the Concord Tax (or, if you like titles, call it the Law Enforcement Funding Accord of the Second Yulai Convention -- lol). The Concord Tax would be a 15% tax leveed on all mission rewards and pirate bounties paid out in systems where Concord operates, as well as on all minerals refined in those same systems. Maybe there could be a skill that reduces (but doesn't eliminate) the Concord Tax, but not Accounting -- IMO it would need to be something like a Rank 8 trade skill that required a certain level of Corp Management as a prerequisite in addition to the usual Trade prereqs. The probable benefit of such a system is that it would make low sec activities inherently more valuable than the same activities in high sec, including mining (or at least refining) low- end ores; furthermore it would achieve that benefit without needing to shuffle agents around, adjust loot tables, rework ore distribution or any other hamfisted adjustments to basic game mechanics. In gameplay terms players could remain in high sec for a hassle- free but reduced income while it would actually be worthwhile (for a change!) for more ambitious players to pool their resources and try to tackle low sec. Comments/ flames/ arguments/ polemics anybody? I thought it was a decent solution myself. They tax the shit out of smokers, yet people still smoke, and love it. They tax our drinks that we provide at social events and social gathering places, yet people still go there and drink. Do you truly think that taxing high sec is going to move people out of high sec? Personally I think this will only hurt those that mine veldspar for money and everyone else will keep on going doing what they do. No tax will ever solve the fact that -10 goofballs don't have the standings to run level 5 missions in the low sec area that they control. To me that is the true problem. Pirates could run level 4-5 missions with basically no problems if they take over the right systems but then complain that level 4 high sec mission runners are making too much money. PLEASE SPARE ME THE EMPATHY... Just because all you pirates are too dumb to take over a system(s) that has an agent that at least one of you can run level 4 or 5 missions for is an injustice...SHUT THE FRACK UP ALREADY. You are really starting to resort to dumb as hell tactics for this shit on EVE-O.
Rashmika Clavain Gallente Revelation Space	Posted - 2008.08.26 09:52:00 - [42] I like the idea of taxing people who loafe it up in NPC corps though However, using tax as a method of moving potential piracry targets from Empire into low sec where you can have the pleasure of ganking them is not going to work. Removed. Please keep your EVE signature related to your EVE persona and not that of a real life politician. Navigator
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.26 10:23:00 - [43] Thanks for posting this, Dave, and you put a whole lot more thought into it than I ever did. As you can see from the flames and general hate and discontent (usually posted by someone who you've never seen post before on the forums ... or Drunk Driver, who'll be here eventually ), it's hard to discuss anything as others would try and make you believe that the 'majority' is against you. The 'Perceived' Problem is just that, one perception of a handful of forum posters who have gone well out of their way to explain something that they feel is deficient with the game. This is actually MANY small issues, and overall results in the belief that (especially with the upcoming fixes talked about in dev blogs, if one can count them) hisec space will be far more secure than it ever was, taking some of the more valuable assets of 'combat PvP' from many gamers, and nerfing and removing several mechanics which it is predicted will result in hisec having even MORE gamers, becoming even more overcrowded and laggy, and resulting in the loss of players due to boredom and poorly functioning games. Many hisec dwellers seem to have no real want nor appreciation for combat PvP. As players, they should have every right to pursue the style of game they wish. At the same time, the proposed changes may affect many OTHER players and take away their style of play. Though some will never fully appreciate it (I hate suicide tactics myself, but meh), they still pay just as much money per month as the rest of us. As another side to the issue, players are feeling pressured into moving to hisec, or at least maintaining an alt or jump clone there, in order to compete in the rest of the game. Losec and nulsec dwellers, or FW individuals. The reason for this is that making hisec profits requires very little effort, can be very efficient, and the money gleaned is of fair rate. These individuals have no real encouragement to make make money where they live, and are in part responsible for many of hisec's 'issues', including the draw of hisec wardecs, the push for more hisec systems, the overcrowding of hisec, and the drops in hisec markets. Many suggested 'fixes' have come up, almost all of them directly concerned with changing only 'missions' in some way. They fail to recognize, despite having the point made sometimes violently in a hundred replies, that missioning is only one corner of hisec operations. Directly changing missions runners leaves the impression that the change is asked 'in revenge', instead of for an actual purpose. Introducing a new tax has both an in-game reasoning, a logical consequence, and reasonably affects all hisec dwellers at the same time, without further upsetting the economy by trying to balance losec and nulsec rewards against abuse. If hisec is going to be more safe, let it. And tax it. Tax my mission payouts. Tax my offices. Tax my market deals. Tax my bounties. Tax my sales. Tax my refinery. Let the players PAY for their security. Because in other parts of space, they pay with effort and teamwork. Thanks again for the post, Dave. Your never going to live this down now. Not with this crowd Quote: If you like playing EvE, but don't like to PvP ... Maybe it's time you recognize that you don't really like to play EvE.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.26 10:29:00 - [44] Originally by: Dave Davies Originally by: Soporo Percieved... So nerf Empire to make another area more valluable?? Why not call for a boost to that area instead, eh? Oh that's right, your not interested in a boost, just more targets, amirite? No, you are not "rite" and neither are you right for that matter. I'm as carebear as they come: I live in high sec, I'm training an invention alt, I've got a spreadsheet for my manufacturing sales and I run my own supply chain; I run missions and so far I've racked up zero player kills. Sad, I know, but there it is and nothing lasts forever. The reason I want high sec nerfed instead of low sec boosted is that honestly it just seems too easy to get ahead in high sec. People that say "I have done it but it is too easy" like you are saying, forget the NOW part. It is easy for you now that you have plenty of isk and skills, so that nerfing high sec will not damage your income much and can even increase it (as you are a manufacturer it can mean higher margin on trading). But you are totally forgetting people that have to start getting those isk and skills. "But they can go to low sec to gain." Sure, after they have learned a bit how EVE work, what you need to do to survive and made a "buffer tank" of isk to cover for unexpected losses. But if high sec is heavily nerfed they will have no way to get that isk "buffer tank", skills or experience.
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.26 10:29:00 - [45] Taxing players will not move anybody out of hisec. Might as well get that one out of the way now. What will it do? It'll make those who use hisec only to fund PvP operations (losec dwellers, FW operators, nulsec guys) reconsider overcrowding the hisec systems, as they might start seeing that they could make more money where they live, instead of in hisec. Bean counters might leave. The guys going for every inch of profit. Macro-miners and macro-runners probably wouldn't. I'm sure it would cause a new player once and awhile to go 'man, this sucks', look up a good nulsec corp and enlist. IF your goal is to FORCE players out of hisec, there are better ways to do it. Changing missions was one of them. Nerfing NPC corps is another. But, IF your goal is to balance the raised (or potentially raised) level of security of living in hisec with the lack thereof in losec, then a overarching tax is suitable. Everyone ends up paying for their security. If you live in nulsec, you pay for it with a corp tax, or with the effort of you and your alliance. Teamwork pays for this level of security you appreciate, which can sometimes rival hisec. The same goes for losec. And with this, if your in hisec, your own money will pay the governments for the security you appreciate. Seems fair and fairly reasonable to me. Quote: If you like playing EvE, but don't like to PvP ... Maybe it's time you recognize that you don't really like to play EvE.
TrulyKosh Gallente Solo for UNCLE	Posted - 2008.08.26 10:56:00 - [46] Originally by: Ruze Let the players PAY for their security. Because in other parts of space, they pay with effort and teamwork. Following the train of thought, all bounty payments in 0.0 should come from the space holding alliance itself. The players there are not paying taxes to Concord, so why should Concord pay them bounties for rats they kill in space where they have no presence? Speaking of which, why should these 0.0 rats give a player any sec status increase?
Zephyr Rengate dearg doom	Posted - 2008.08.26 11:00:00 - [47] So players who dont pay security dont get concord protection. I want.
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.26 11:02:00 - [48] Originally by: TrulyKosh Originally by: Ruze Let the players PAY for their security. Because in other parts of space, they pay with effort and teamwork. Following the train of thought, all bounty payments in 0.0 should come from the space holding alliance itself. The players there are not paying taxes to Concord, so why should Concord pay them bounties for rats they kill in space where they have no presence? Speaking of which, why should these 0.0 rats give a player any sec status increase? Is it bad that I agree with you? I'd also like to let nulsec corporations hire agents to do missions from. That would make nulsec far more interesting, at least to me. Quote: If you like playing EvE, but don't like to PvP ... Maybe it's time you recognize that you don't really like to play EvE.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.26 11:07:00 - [49] Edited by: Venkul Mul on 26/08/2008 11:08:00 Originally by: Dave Davies Quote: They're idiots if they make a deal with a pvp corp frankly, see above. Nah. That 15% cushion gives you a lot more wiggle room for making a deal AND it keeps you from having to be one of the lemmings we just described. And what you will pay the PvP corp for? "Don't shoot me" ? = "Sorry, James shoot you but he is not in our corporation" (90% an alt of some of them) "Protect me" ? = "Sorry we missed someone, next time be more careful" (unless they live by NSBI the can't lock a low sec syste, and NBSI wouldn't be really sufficient) and "Hey, we aren't there for you, we will not gatecamp while you mine, we have better things to do" People going to low sec don't like to spend time protecting miners and paying protection money to 10 different gangs (so you don't get fired by all the pirate in the area) will get you broke.
Schalac Caldari Apocalypse Reign	Posted - 2008.08.26 11:09:00 - [50] The way I see it, high sec doesn't pay enough. How many moons are there in highsec? And why can't we mine them for their minerals? Why do you need to put a PoS up in unsecure space to get isk for basically just having a PoS there? Oh wait am I encroaching on a reason that owning low sec and null sec space is better than empire? Whatever... I emplore people to look beyond the goofball that runs missions in motsu all day and maybe join me in this setup http://www.battleclinic.com/forum/index.php/topic,21220.0.html One, 1 day, and we could all join the biggest suicide fleet ever seen by CCP and EVE. The goons have nothing on people that can train into a pure suicide caracal within 1 day of a trial accounts life. Are you with me brothers and sisters? Let us make our name known for 14 days. Then change it with a new trial account. The EULA says that recycling alts is a nono, but trial accounts are a whole different thing. A whole different account. What is CCP going to do if we go this route? Ban me for suggesting it? That would be unfortunate but they can't prove that I had any involvement besides just putting the idea out there. And I don't know how iceland works but in America that doesn't fly. And I have way to much time on my hands recently to be a *** in anyones ass that I feel like being a *** to.. .Not much income but the fringe benefits are great. I say we do it. WHO IS WITH ME???
TrulyKosh Gallente Solo for UNCLE	Posted - 2008.08.26 11:14:00 - [51] Originally by: Ruze Is it bad that I agree with you? I'd also like to let nulsec corporations hire agents to do missions from. That would make nulsec far more interesting, at least to me. Not at all. The 0.0 corp agents sound like an interesting idea. The sheer idea of 1000s of goons running dry BoB's wallet by running missions from their outposts is staggering :)) However, giving away these missions would mean having to grant them docking rights. And that, i guess, most 0.0 alliances would not like to see. (Not that afk cloakers are any better than those sitting inside your outposts):) .
Heartcarver Goat Gangbangers	Posted - 2008.08.26 11:26:00 - [52] Originally by: jrambox Edited by: jrambox on 26/08/2008 06:10:27 HOW ABOUT THE OP PAYS ME HALF OF HIS INCOME AND SHUTS THE **** OFF. I happen to be a high sec player and I like it. Why should I be taxed by it. Why do you care if I make moneys in high sec? How does it affect your 0.0 life? Quit Eve Go back to school, please. "The point of war isn't to die for your country, it's to make the other bastard die for his"
Viqtoria Caldari Groping Hand Social Club	Posted - 2008.08.26 11:28:00 - [53] i never knew gordon brown played eve.
Another Forum'Alt	Posted - 2008.08.26 11:31:00 - [54] Originally by: Viqtoria i never knew gordon brown played eve.
necronarcosis Shadow Company G00DFELLAS	Posted - 2008.08.26 11:33:00 - [55] Edited by: necronarcosis on 26/08/2008 11:34:23 for the larger part isk devaluation is down to over farming or ore ice and lvl 4 missions, those being in high sec in npc corperations have nothing to fear and rake in the isk day after day. increase lvl- 1 and lv2 mission rewards for noobs, and slap a 35 40% tax rate on any npc corp. after all you are paying for their protection. players should be fed into player corps and actively discoraged from playing in a npc corp all of there eve life, after all they did sign up for a mmorpg, not elite.
eXtas Atomic Battle Penguins	Posted - 2008.08.26 11:36:00 - [56] a tax for old ppl in npc corps sounds like a really nice idea! the ppl that hide in npc corps have allways anoyed me but I never thought of a good idea how to nerf it. But if a 3 month old char got hit by a 15% tax, a 6 month old 30% tax.. up to 50% or something it would make a lot of farmers leave the npc corps... they still would be allmost totaly safe from wardecks because of corpjumping and other ways to avoid wardecks but you would atleast have a chance to wardeck them :) --------
Another Forum'Alt	Posted - 2008.08.26 11:36:00 - [57] Originally by: necronarcosis Edited by: necronarcosis on 26/08/2008 11:34:23 for the larger part isk devaluation is down to over farming or ore ice and lvl 4 missions, those being in high sec in npc corperations have nothing to fear and rake in the isk day after day. increase lvl- 1 and lv2 mission rewards for noobs, and slap a 35 40% tax rate on any npc corp. after all you are paying for their protection. players should be fed into player corps and actively discoraged from playing in a npc corp all of there eve life, after all they did sign up for a mmorpg, not elite. Where did it say an MMORPG has to be played in a blob? Oh wait, I see now... NOWHERE.
Another Forum'Alt	Posted - 2008.08.26 11:42:00 - [58] What about if in 0.0, rat bounties were set at 2x the level of highsec, and because there is no CONCORD in 0.0, the cash for the bounties comes from the alliance who has sovreignty.
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.26 11:48:00 - [59] Originally by: Hakkan Koftar What this boils down to is some misinformed players making some bad assumptions about low/null-sec space and their desire to enforce their preferred playstyle on others. 1) Nullsec is vastly more profitable than high-sec for a miner or a PvE (missioner/ratter) player. As a miner and ratter I am able to make twice the isk per hour in 0.0 than I could in high sec only a month or two ago. 2) Low sec has no value at all. Nerf high sec all you like you still won't get more players in lowsec. Primarily because lowsec is more dangerous than nullsec but also because it is less profitable than either option. Even with a 15% tax on highsec, lowsec will still suck and you will not find more people there. Any corps operating in lowsec, especially miners, are either naive or haven't been able to join a 0.0 alliance. So to sum up, in order to get more players in lowsec, you need to leave high-sec alone and address the problems of inherent danger in lowsec. Until lowsec is safer than 0.0 it's going to be empty. Where I disagree with you, is that a) I don't think the majority of hisec players are playing in hisec to avoid PvP, but instead, I think that a large portion of hisec players are simply alts and jump clones of those living in nulsec and losec. There are also many hisec individuals who live in hisec for the SAKE of PvP, be it wardecs, suicides, or FW. As well as traders and manufacturers, producers. b) I don't think that you can boost losec without in turn boosting nulsec, as these two are fairly balanced in profit scaling. Boosting both would have the same effect as the tax, especially if the boost was high enough to allow a player to compensate for that lifestyle. c) I believe the inherent problems with security in losec should be solved by PLAYER actions, and not CCP. Especially considering that yes, losec missions ARE more profitable, but without a real industrial base (due to mineral imbalance, etc), there isn't much call to even move into losec out of hisec. And without giving all industrialists a reason to leave (i.e. higher profit margins, or fixing mineral balance again), you cannot have a more secure losec. Quote: If you like playing EvE, but don't like to PvP ... Maybe it's time you recognize that you don't really like to play EvE.
eXtas Atomic Battle Penguins	Posted - 2008.08.26 11:50:00 - [60] Originally by: Ruze Originally by: eXtas a tax for old ppl in npc corps sounds like a really nice idea! the ppl that hide in npc corps have allways anoyed me but I never thought of a good idea how to nerf it. But if a 3 month old char got hit by a 15% tax, a 6 month old 30% tax.. up to 50% or something it would make a lot of farmers leave the npc corps... they still would be allmost totaly safe from wardecks because of corpjumping and other ways to avoid wardecks but you would atleast have a chance to wardeck them :) While it's nice that you like the idea, I don't agree with you and many who have replied on WHY it's a good idea. Making new targets for wardecs is not something I personally care about. It's also part of the reason that, every time such a topic is brought up, it gets mauled to death by fanboi's and wussies, who think that everyone and their mother wants to force them to play the game as they see it. Yes, I think using the corp mechanics or the beginner corp is an exploit. But I don't think that major changes to hisec profit margins should be made in order to fix this exploit. I think it needs to be addressed in another manner, and as much as possible, be kept separate from any financial ramifications. So while I didn't make the post, I do feel that your comments are AS harmful to the discussion as those flaming the poster for being a 'pirate looking for targets'. its not that I want more targets to wardeck. its those ppl that hide behind a noobcorp for several years that anoys me. allready when I was a noob the npc corp guys farming 3/10 serp plexes in empire anoyed me and there was no way to do anything.. those same guys still are in noobcorps. atm you can suicide on them with 1-5 ravens but that is going to get nerfed soon. Then npc corp members will be even safer and really should get a nerf. about highsec giving all to much isk... not really.. only the lvl4 missions give ok isk. and the players can be wardecked IF they are in a corp! --------
Karii Ildarian Caldari Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2008.08.26 11:52:00 - [61] Originally by: Ruze Originally by: Hakkan Koftar What this boils down to is some misinformed players making some bad assumptions about low/null-sec space and their desire to enforce their preferred playstyle on others. 1) Nullsec is vastly more profitable than high-sec for a miner or a PvE (missioner/ratter) player. As a miner and ratter I am able to make twice the isk per hour in 0.0 than I could in high sec only a month or two ago. 2) Low sec has no value at all. Nerf high sec all you like you still won't get more players in lowsec. Primarily because lowsec is more dangerous than nullsec but also because it is less profitable than either option. Even with a 15% tax on highsec, lowsec will still suck and you will not find more people there. Any corps operating in lowsec, especially miners, are either naive or haven't been able to join a 0.0 alliance. So to sum up, in order to get more players in lowsec, you need to leave high-sec alone and address the problems of inherent danger in lowsec. Until lowsec is safer than 0.0 it's going to be empty. Where I disagree with you, is that a) I don't think the majority of hisec players are playing in hisec to avoid PvP, but instead, I think that a large portion of hisec players are simply alts and jump clones of those living in nulsec and losec. There are also many hisec individuals who live in hisec for the SAKE of PvP, be it wardecs, suicides, or FW. As well as traders and manufacturers, producers. b) I don't think that you can boost losec without in turn boosting nulsec, as these two are fairly balanced in profit scaling. Boosting both would have the same effect as the tax, especially if the boost was high enough to allow a player to compensate for that lifestyle. c) I believe the inherent problems with security in losec should be solved by PLAYER actions, and not CCP. Especially considering that yes, losec missions ARE more profitable, but without a real industrial base (due to mineral imbalance, etc), there isn't much call to even move into losec out of hisec. And without giving all industrialists a reason to leave (i.e. higher profit margins, or fixing mineral balance again), you cannot have a more secure losec. Maybe an insta-jib to -10 for a player that kills another player, with a potive sec rating, in low sec. Then move all the missions to low sec. Risk vs. Reward
eXtas Atomic Battle Penguins	Posted - 2008.08.26 12:04:00 - [62] andabout lowsec... it will allways be a crappy place for anyone but pirates :P 0.0 is a lot safer then lowsec, there you know who is hostile and not.. in lowsec anyone will atack you :) --------
Davina Braben	Posted - 2008.08.26 12:04:00 - [63] 15% tax doesn't seem excessive and does deal solely with profitability. Probably shouldn't apply it to rank newbies though.
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.26 12:21:00 - [64] Originally by: Davina Braben 15% tax doesn't seem excessive and does deal solely with profitability. Probably shouldn't apply it to rank newbies though. I do kinda agree there. Either it shouldn't apply, or maybe level 1 missions could be boosted to help compensate. Of course, as a beginning player, we're all broke, but I sure as heck felt more broke two+ years ago than starting up a new player now. The market is so low, you can afford alot within a short week of missions, and they even give you junk when you do the tutorial missions. So I'm not sure if that 15% tax would affect the new playerbase anymore than it affected those of us who played many years back. If we could do it with outrageous prices, can't the new players do it? Quote: If you like playing EvE, but don't like to PvP ... Maybe it's time you recognize that you don't really like to play EvE.
Alannis Gallente The Plantation	Posted - 2008.08.26 13:24:00 - [65] If you are not making more money in 0.0 than high sec then you are doing something wrong. Many people (myself included) have lived in 0.0 and find it pretty dull. There are lots of reasons for finding it dull and there are many other threads covering that. But it's 95% dull followed by 5% fun. 0.0 is pretty safe. If you don't know where the reds are 5 jumps before they get near you and you are in alliance space then you are not reading intel channels/corp chat/local gossip in blue systems. High Sec tends to provide more team effort ISK making and missions provide more variation that warp to belt > kill rat > repeat. And it's not bad ISK, however it's not as profitable as ratting in any decent (0.0) system. Most people play this game (indeed like the players of most other games) to accumulate things (Skill Points, ISK, Items, Ships - whatever). I would guess a large % of the player base plays less than 10 hours a week. So why on earth should those people who do not share your goals be forced out of being a carebear, or have the current system taken away from them? Ahhhh. Because you want some more stuff to shoot out that doesn't involve a blob. Gotcha. Forget I said anything, (Yes I did read the entire thread).
Larkonis Trassler Neo Spartans	Posted - 2008.08.26 13:35:00 - [66] Although I am all in favour of a lowsec boost I'm not sure if this is the way to do it. The resulting nerd rage would be quite intense. Lowsec needs a boost. I remember 1 1/2 - 2 years ago lowsec was full of people, or certainly had a lot more hanging around. Yes I want more targets. I also want more fights. Leave the '0.0 is for people who want fights'. Everytime I have gone roaming there recently the systems are either full of hangar queens or blobs. I can think of one 'balanced fight' right up until another 2 Falcons decloaked on us (this was a 5 vs 5 engagement with the baddies already having 1 falcon on station). But I digress. A lowsec boost and a slight hisec nerf might encourage people to come and play in lowsec, then again it might not. I'm not after solo players. I'm after mid sized empire corps who want to foster a bit of community spirit and get their members working together. I want to try and disrupt a mining op in a belt only to be chased around for half an hour. Where I live there used to be 2-3 defence channels and you'd get a response from the locals if you got something. Now... nothing, it's mostly pirates shooting other pirates. Suggestions: Remove drone missions from hisec. Stop lowsec agents giving out missions in neighbouring hisec systems. Give all hisec level 3/4 agents a finite number of missions to hand out per hour. Maybe a 5-10% Concord tax, 15 is a little harsh. Boost lowsec/0.0 mission rewards by 10-20% Boost lowsec ore (lets see some low end high ends in there) or at least spawn more high quality mining sites. Boost lowsec belt rats, up to 650k battleships. Add more production and research slots to lowsec stations Assumption of Risk
AleRiperKilt	Posted - 2008.08.26 13:54:00 - [67] Originally by: Larkonis Trassler Boost lowsec/0.0 mission rewards by 10-20% Boost lowsec ore (lets see some low end high ends in there) or at least spawn more high quality mining sites. Boost lowsec belt rats, up to 650k battleships. Add more production and research slots to lowsec stations IMHO, the main reason people don¦t go lowsec is the high chance of getting ganked. Boost rewards all you want, people wont go there. If you increase number of lowsec systems thought, pirate/system ratio decreases and lowsec feels "safer" Until that happens your only shot at bringing people lowsec is to make it "safer". Claim a lowsec constellation and gank any other pirate to oblivion, protect your hunting grounds and let carebears slowly come by. Gank one every once in a while.... --- "I live in Los Angeles, where driving is non-consensual pvp" - Arric Rohr
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.26 13:58:00 - [68] As has been pointed out many times, if your goal is to get players into losec, the simple and easy solution would be to remove local. Easier than trying to balance rewards/effort/etc. Luckily, this discussion isn't about getting people into losec or out of hisec. Quote: If you like playing EvE, but don't like to PvP ... Maybe it's time you recognize that you don't really like to play EvE.
Larkonis Trassler Neo Spartans	Posted - 2008.08.26 14:09:00 - [69] Originally by: AleRiperKilt Originally by: Larkonis Trassler Boost lowsec/0.0 mission rewards by 10-20% Boost lowsec ore (lets see some low end high ends in there) or at least spawn more high quality mining sites. Boost lowsec belt rats, up to 650k battleships. Add more production and research slots to lowsec stations IMHO, the main reason people don¦t go lowsec is the high chance of getting ganked. Boost rewards all you want, people wont go there. If you increase number of lowsec systems thought, pirate/system ratio decreases and lowsec feels "safer" Until that happens your only shot at bringing people lowsec is to make it "safer". Claim a lowsec constellation and gank any other pirate to oblivion, protect your hunting grounds and let carebears slowly come by. Gank one every once in a while.... This is exactly the sort of wrong attitude. If you want a piece of lowsec get together with some friends (this is an MMORPG after all) and go and drive the pirates out. You have sentries on your side (no small ships to bother you). If you fight hard enough then the pirates will: Stop bothering you, strike a deal or move out. A bit of community spirit goes a long way. Assumption of Risk
Zen Mehari	Posted - 2008.08.26 15:02:00 - [70] Edited by: Zen Mehari on 26/08/2008 15:03:50
Matalino Gallente Ki Tech Industries	Posted - 2008.08.26 15:09:00 - [71] Edited by: Matalino on 26/08/2008 15:09:55 Originally by: Dave Davies The Concord Tax would be a 15% tax leveed on all mission rewards and pirate bounties paid out in systems where Concord operates, as well as on all minerals refined in those same systems. Maybe there could be a skill that reduces (but doesn't eliminate) the Concord Tax, but not Accounting -- IMO it would need to be something like a Rank 8 trade skill that required a certain level of Corp Management as a prerequisite in addition to the usual Trade prereqs. Problem 1 - Your proposed reduction in payouts in high sec could be equated to an increase in payouts in low sec. So your plan assumes that 17.6% increased rewards would encourage people to move to low sec. That isn't going to get a dedicated mission runner to leave high sec. It wouldn't even be a concideration. Choice run a mission in a disposable setup in low sec and get 17.6% more reward (assuming you don't lose it to pirates) or run missions 15% faster in high sec using an tweaked out setup. What do you think people will still do? Problem 2 - Essential skills become standard. If there was a skill that increases mission payouts as you are suggesting it would become as standard as the learning skills. All that skill would do is act as a time sink for new players. Mission rewards would then be even heavier biased in favor of those who focus on running them in high sec. Your tax would hit heaviest on those who are new to the game or who only run missions in high sec occationally. Those who are dedicated to cashing in on the high sec rewards would simply suck up the time sink with the standard amount of whining, but would otherwise be unaffected. There are really only two ways to get people out of high sec: - Remove high sec completely - Remove ALL content from high sec
Aarin Wrath Caldari	Posted - 2008.08.26 15:11:00 - [72] Oh wow. Yet another "nerf highsec" thread. As you so very well put, this is a perceived problem. I have yet to see any reason beyond "risk vs reward" that supports a nerf. Eve is not "risk vs reward", its "effort vs reward". Missions take time, Mining takes time, everything takes time. Thats what determines your pay rate, not the level of risk. As I said before in another thread exactly like this one: If Eve was based on "risk vs reward", people in lowsec would be billionaires. That is not the case however.
Sanzorz Amarr EVEfan.dk	Posted - 2008.08.26 15:12:00 - [73] Originally by: Ruze As has been pointed out many times, if your goal is to get players into losec, the simple and easy solution would be to remove local. Easier than trying to balance rewards/effort/etc. Luckily, this discussion isn't about getting people into losec or out of hisec. What kind of nonesense is this? Being able to see if local is populated or not as a carebear is the only reason to go there. If you can't see if there are any people, you'll be in for a very bad surprise if you're probing or scanning for people. A very bad move for newer players for sure.
Sergeant Spot Black Eclipse Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.08.26 15:16:00 - [74] for the love of God, when will the whiny morons finally get a life and understand that the residents of high sec that are not interested in any pvp will NOT, EVER, be forced to chose between poverty and being a suicide monkey. GET OVER IT FOR GOD'S SAKE. Play nice while you butcher each other.
Ghoest	Posted - 2008.08.26 15:18:00 - [75] This is just another stupid "nerf high sec rewards" thread. Theres is no difference between a 15% tax and 15 percent lower rewards. Dont nerf high sec - instead buff low sec. If you think corp is different than a guild or clan you have some insecurity issues.
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.26 15:19:00 - [76] Originally by: Aarin Wrath Oh wow. Yet another "nerf highsec" thread. As you so very well put, this is a perceived problem. I have yet to see any reason beyond "risk vs reward" that supports a nerf. Eve is not "risk vs reward", its "effort vs reward". Missions take time, Mining takes time, everything takes time. Thats what determines your pay rate, not the level of risk. As I said before in another thread exactly like this one: If Eve was based on "risk vs reward", people in lowsec would be billionaires. That is not the case however. Are we counting the effort it takes to keep yourself secure and flying in losec and nulsec? The effort your corpmates or alliance members (if you have any) have to go through in order to keep your space free of interlopers? The effort involved in transporting things to and from market zones, in acquiring replacement drones and ammo, in replacing lost ships and burnt-out modules? In terms of effort, the 'effort' involved in accomplishing the act is minimal for hisec mission running. This of course is subjective to the individual, of course, as some players find it a real 'effort' to sit at the keyboard and mine for hours on end, while others see it as no effort at all. 'Effort', just as 'risk', is still an iffy way of rationalizing why something should or should not be changed. Truth be told, missions are very little effort the more skilled you become, and yet they yield higher profit because you can do them more efficiently. It's almost as if effort has an inverse effect on monetary income. Look at the low 'effort' professions. Trading. Manufacturing. Moon mining. Also note that these are by and far more profitable. Luckily, this thread is about allowing payers who rely on hisec for security the BALANCE of also paying for that security. As do players who expend effort in nulsec and losec, who spend valuable time and effort, and in some cases isk, to ensure the same level of security as hisec. Quote: If you like playing EvE, but don't like to PvP ... Maybe it's time you recognize that you don't really like to play EvE.
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.26 15:20:00 - [77] Originally by: Sergeant Spot for the love of God, when will the whiny morons finally get a life and understand that the residents of high sec that are not interested in any pvp will NOT, EVER, be forced to chose between poverty and being a suicide monkey. GET OVER IT FOR GOD'S SAKE. Sir, do you recognize that you are 'whining' in this comment? Quote: If you like playing EvE, but don't like to PvP ... Maybe it's time you recognize that you don't really like to play EvE.
Clair Bear Coalition of Nations Free Trade Zone.	Posted - 2008.08.26 15:27:00 - [78] The fundamental flaw in much of the 'buff lowsec' reasoning is the underlying premise that all of eve must be made equal. I'm fine with variety. You go to 0.0 to blob the living crap out of each other and mine POSes with dreads, highsec to grind while asleep & suicide miners and finally you go to lowsec for hard mode ganks. What's wrong with that?
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.26 15:32:00 - [79] Originally by: Clair Bear The fundamental flaw in much of the 'buff lowsec' reasoning is the underlying premise that all of eve must be made equal. I'm fine with variety. You go to 0.0 to blob the living crap out of each other and mine POSes with dreads, highsec to grind while asleep & suicide miners and finally you go to lowsec for hard mode ganks. What's wrong with that? Need more hisec systems. Tad bit overcrowded. Need more hisec agents, too. And if we mission runners can make this kind of cash, minerals in hisec need to be balanced up. An hour mining the best minerals in hisec should net the same as an hour fighting in the best level 4, including salvage/lp/bounties/loot. There's a thousand ways this game could go. No one way is right, just more commonly accepted. Great, ain't it? Quote: If you like playing EvE, but don't like to PvP ... Maybe it's time you recognize that you don't really like to play EvE.
Sergeant Spot Black Eclipse Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.08.26 15:34:00 - [80] Originally by: Ruze Originally by: Sergeant Spot for the love of God, when will the whiny morons finally get a life and understand that the residents of high sec that are not interested in any pvp will NOT, EVER, be forced to chose between poverty and being a suicide monkey. GET OVER IT FOR GOD'S SAKE. Sir, do you recognize that you are 'whining' in this comment? Well, I was thinking of it more as an angry rant, but yeah, you got me. Still, I get really irritated by folks that just day in and day out, seem to have an almost primal sexual urge to get CCP to force empire dwellers into suicide monkeys. I like a game where folks can choose their own direction. Its that simple. And I don't apply that just to "MY" style of play. Game depth for the win. I MEAN THAT. And it "requires" a variety of viable and meaningful play styles. PvP is the Heart of Eve. But a heart by itself is just a quivering hunk of meat rapidly dying due to lack of oxygen. Play nice while you butcher each other.
Traidor Disloyal I Am Not A Lawyer	Posted - 2008.08.26 15:45:00 - [81] Originally by: Dave Davies The Concord Tax would be a 15% tax leveed on all mission rewards and pirate bounties paid out in systems where Concord operates, as well as on all minerals refined in those same systems. You know what I hate more then anything else in this world? Taxing me to encourage me to behave another way. You can shove those taxes where the sun don't shine. Notice, no smile face. --------------------------------------------- Love is having a second account with a cov ops pilot
SPIONKOP Caldari PIZZALUVERS	Posted - 2008.08.26 15:46:00 - [82] So you want to get more people into low sec or 0.0 space. The only reason I can think is that you want more prey to kill? I don't do alliances. 10% Corp tax then the alliance screws you on refine tax and you are also expected to pay inflated prices for supplies. Thats if your not camping a gate, or locked in stations. So I guess that rules out 0.0 space. As for low sec. Why should I fund the pirates with ransoms and loot from my ship as it either blown up by the gate gamp or probed out from the mission areas. Sure the mission could make me 20mil but why risk 10 times that in ships/implants. So I guess that rules out low sec. If Concord started taxing minerals then the seller would simply put the price up. Its the demand for minerals that sets the price. A refine tax will see fewer minerals on the market thus the price goes up. The seller makes the same ISK, its the buyer who will simply pay more. This will see all empire prices rise in line with the tax. Would miners flock to low sec. I think not. Hulks make nice easy prey. Whats the ransom on a hulk these days? 50mil? Give me a good reason to come to low sec and 0.0 space and I will look into it. Tax me in empire and I will pass the tax back on to the buyer. I make the same ISK, you pay more for the ships, mods, ammo, POS fuel etc. I enjoy my PVP on the market, its far safer. --------------------------------------------- Space For Rent. 100mil ISK/Week.
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.26 15:51:00 - [83] Originally by: SPIONKOP So you want to get more people into low sec or 0.0 space. The only reason I can think is that you want more prey to kill? I don't do alliances. 10% Corp tax then the alliance screws you on refine tax and you are also expected to pay inflated prices for supplies. Thats if your not camping a gate, or locked in stations. So I guess that rules out 0.0 space. As for low sec. Why should I fund the pirates with ransoms and loot from my ship as it either blown up by the gate gamp or probed out from the mission areas. Sure the mission could make me 20mil but why risk 10 times that in ships/implants. So I guess that rules out low sec. If Concord started taxing minerals then the seller would simply put the price up. Its the demand for minerals that sets the price. A refine tax will see fewer minerals on the market thus the price goes up. The seller makes the same ISK, its the buyer who will simply pay more. This will see all empire prices rise in line with the tax. Would miners flock to low sec. I think not. Hulks make nice easy prey. Whats the ransom on a hulk these days? 50mil? Give me a good reason to come to low sec and 0.0 space and I will look into it. Tax me in empire and I will pass the tax back on to the buyer. I make the same ISK, you pay more for the ships, mods, ammo, POS fuel etc. I enjoy my PVP on the market, its far safer. I would like to not be so lonely. Here I am, out in losec, and nobodies around. A good corp would be nice, 20-30 other individuals who like to mainly do missions but are up for a good fight with a local pirate group now and again. Heck, I could even put up with a dozen industrialists, as long as they keep their mining lasers pointed away from me. I do want kids one day. But targets? Ain't got no interest in targets, really, unless their the squishy-high-bounty-paying-NPC type. Quote: If you like playing EvE, but don't like to PvP ... Maybe it's time you recognize that you don't really like to play EvE.
Solostrom	Posted - 2008.08.26 15:56:00 - [84] no! When will you all get it through your heads. There are some players who simply prefer hisec. We will play the game we prefer. They can play the one they prefer. Unless you want to pay for their accounts.
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.26 16:01:00 - [85] Originally by: Solostrom no! When will you all get it through your heads. There are some players who simply prefer hisec. We will play the game we prefer. They can play the one they prefer. Unless you want to pay for their accounts. Um. I'm so confused ... Who's proposing that you can't play in hisec? In fact, even from the avarice 'nerf hisec' crowd, it seems that the general consensus is to allow hisec to be SAFER, thus further preventing players from being the unwilling victims of PvP. So, who are you yelling at again? And which voices are you listening to? They tell me that I shouldn't listen to those 'other' guys, but sometimes they say funny things. Like to kill my dog. That was a great day ... Quote: If you like playing EvE, but don't like to PvP ... Maybe it's time you recognize that you don't really like to play EvE.
Sanzorz Amarr EVEfan.dk	Posted - 2008.08.26 16:01:00 - [86] Originally by: Ruze I would like to not be so lonely. Here I am, out in losec, and nobodies around. A good corp would be nice, 20-30 other individuals who like to mainly do missions but are up for a good fight with a local pirate group now and again. Heck, I could even put up with a dozen industrialists, as long as they keep their mining lasers pointed away from me. I do want kids one day. But targets? Ain't got no interest in targets, really, unless their the squishy-high-bounty-paying-NPC type. A corp into lowsec might work out fine, but it still sucks if they pirate gang drops in and wtfpwnbbq your entire corp in one go. You've wasted time + alot of money and that can be morale breaking on many players that only play once in a while. These highsec threads only seem to target at the highskilled players playing EVE alot and rarely take notice of the casuals.
Glengrant TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2008.08.26 16:17:00 - [87] Originally by: Another Forum'Alt What about if in 0.0, rat bounties were set at 2x the level of highsec, and because there is no CONCORD in 0.0, the cash for the bounties comes from the alliance who has sovreignty. Well - the rat hunters will almost all be members of that alliance. And where does the alliance get its money from? Right - it's members. So it would need to tax its members to pay the same amount back as bounties. Remove the effort and risk of rat hunting from the equation and it's still the same money. Concord doesn't like piracy wherever it happens. Whatever. It's a source of income. Otherwise there would be only ore and moons. Do you want all pvpers to a) start training for mining or b) come back to high-sec and vacuum what's left of rats? People, really, think about this. is the problem really a problem and does the solution really solve the problem. In this case the problem is imaginary and the proposed solutions don't work anyway. --- ISK BUYER = LOOSER EVE TV- Bring it back!
Turin Caldari Eternity INC. Project Alice.	Posted - 2008.08.26 16:40:00 - [88] Originally by: Larkonis Trassler This is exactly the sort of wrong attitude. If you want a piece of lowsec get together with some friends (this is an MMORPG after all) and go and drive the pirates out. You have sentries on your side (no small ships to bother you). If you fight hard enough then the pirates will: Stop bothering you, strike a deal or move out. A bit of community spirit goes a long way. You are wrong on every level, and let me tell you why. First of all, pirates never go away. Unless you beat the snot out of them over and over and over. And when they do, another group just moves in. And even if you "strike" a deal with them. Odds are they wont honor it... Hello!?!? Pirates?!?!?!? I have played eve many years now. I have taken my sec of space, low sec, nullsec, and so forth. Lowsec was always a profit looser. always. every single time. I have YET to read a thread that I havent interpereted as a pirate whine about "omg pls nerf high sec cause I dont get to grief enough people. Force people to come to low sec so I can have some more lambs to slaughter!!! OMG OMG OMG CCP PLEASE!!!! They make too much money! OH HEY! Lets get rid of concord and high sec all together! Make it all lowsec/nullsec!!! That would be awesome!!!! please please please ccp do something to make life as hard as possible for the evil evil carebears, and as easy as possible for the awesome godlike pirates!!!! They dont desrve to play eve!!!! They are carebears and are obviously less of a person because they dont wanna PVP!!!!!!"
Highwind Cid	Posted - 2008.08.26 16:41:00 - [89] Edited by: Highwind Cid on 26/08/2008 16:45:06 Whoops messed up.
Highwind Cid	Posted - 2008.08.26 16:45:00 - [90] Originally by: Dave Davies ... If the objective of this is to 'kindly push' people into low sec it ain't gonna happen. All that might happen is people go to the safest low sec, aka .5 and fill those systems up, assuming the tax is less as their are less of concord in lower sec spaces. But at the end of they day its an all or nothing situation. Either A) high sec people stay high sec or B) They leave. Going on a whim I'm gonna say CCP will stick with A as B isn't very profitable.
TimMc Gallente Genos Occidere	Posted - 2008.08.26 17:05:00 - [91] I support this product and/or service.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.26 17:19:00 - [92] Originally by: Dave Davies The Concord Tax would be a 15% tax leveed on all mission rewards and pirate bounties paid out in systems where Concord operates, as well as on all minerals refined in those same systems. Maybe there could be a skill that reduces (but doesn't eliminate) the Concord Tax, but not Accounting -- IMO it would need to be something like a Rank 8 trade skill that required a certain level of Corp Management as a prerequisite in addition to the usual Trade prereqs. Just to put it out, that will be the start of the hyperinflation people fear. 15% refine tax and then 15% tax on selling the minerals = 72% of the precedent returns for the same time mining. To get the same quantity of isk from mining miners would increase price by 39%. Then ship builders, to get the same return from ships will apply another 15% increase, for a minimum increase of ship cost by 60%. Tritanium and the other bulky low ends would still not come from low sec as transportation cost more than 15% in time and risk. Ship production will not move to low sec as moving the ships has the same problems as moving the minerals (bulky and risky). All the other stuff will increase in price following the same logic.
Wet Ferret	Posted - 2008.08.26 17:21:00 - [93] Lowsec needs not to be buffed. At least not significantly. Nay, low-sec is the only part of space that has the population that it should have. As it is, there are far too many players in high-sec and far too little players in 0.0 but, low-sec, in terms of average active players per system, is basically fine. But, yeah. These forums seriously need some indicator that the post has ended and the sig has started.
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.26 17:26:00 - [94] Originally by: Venkul Mul Originally by: Dave Davies The Concord Tax would be a 15% tax leveed on all mission rewards and pirate bounties paid out in systems where Concord operates, as well as on all minerals refined in those same systems. Maybe there could be a skill that reduces (but doesn't eliminate) the Concord Tax, but not Accounting -- IMO it would need to be something like a Rank 8 trade skill that required a certain level of Corp Management as a prerequisite in addition to the usual Trade prereqs. Just to put it out, that will be the start of the hyperinflation people fear. 15% refine tax and then 15% tax on selling the minerals = 72% of the precedent returns for the same time mining. To get the same quantity of isk from mining miners would increase price by 39%. Then ship builders, to get the same return from ships will apply another 15% increase, for a minimum increase of ship cost by 60%. Tritanium and the other bulky low ends would still not come from low sec as transportation cost more than 15% in time and risk. Ship production will not move to low sec as moving the ships has the same problems as moving the minerals (bulky and risky). All the other stuff will increase in price following the same logic. Still not sure what's wrong with that. Those who produce in losec and nulsec would have far more freedom AND profit, while submitting themselves to far more risk and effort. The market as it is now is riding the bare backs of production costs. Good thing for the buyers, horrible for the seller. However, with this 'buffer zone' in place, those who are willing to put their neck and their BPO's and BPC's on the line by traveling to a back-alley system that is 'supposedly' crawling with pirates, will be able to build and market to hisec costs, getting a quick and powerful boost in profit potential. As far as 'paying too much' is concerned, I'm sure you were around a year or even two ago, when T2 items were far and away more expensive than named, and battleships were a real investment for many players under a year old. Now, I can easily buy a Geddon a week, and I spend far too much time playing EvE-O forums than the game itself. Considering I'm floating at only 15mil sp, rated right up there with a seven and eight month player, it's not that bad a deal. Quote: If you like playing EvE, but don't like to PvP ... Maybe it's time you recognize that you don't really like to play EvE.
Towan Li	Posted - 2008.08.26 17:32:00 - [95] You want carebears and mission runners to move to low or no-sec? Two words: Implant Insurance.
Larkonis Trassler Neo Spartans	Posted - 2008.08.26 17:46:00 - [96] Originally by: Turin Originally by: Larkonis Trassler This is exactly the sort of wrong attitude. If you want a piece of lowsec get together with some friends (this is an MMORPG after all) and go and drive the pirates out. You have sentries on your side (no small ships to bother you). If you fight hard enough then the pirates will: Stop bothering you, strike a deal or move out. A bit of community spirit goes a long way. You are wrong on every level, and let me tell you why. First of all, pirates never go away. Unless you beat the snot out of them over and over and over. And when they do, another group just moves in. And even if you "strike" a deal with them. Odds are they wont honor it... Hello!?!? Pirates?!?!?!? HELLO!?!!? MORON. I have accepted protection money and never backed down, even with freighters coming through and caps a plenty. It's a funny attitude I see among a lot of Eve players. If a bully kicks sand in their face they go off and whine, they don't seek to get even. Idle threats aside. I'm not hiding the fact that I want more targets. But currently lowsec is pretty rubbish and in serious need of a buff. At the same time empire dwellers are raking in a very large amount of isk at low risk. I would like to see lowsec as a stepping ground for corps, pvp and industry before making the jump to 0.0 alliance stuff, right now there is no incentive for this at all. There is a reasonable amount of profit in living in lowsec but very few people are willing to get their act together and defend their space. This perpetrated by the myths that all pirates dishonour ransoms, there is a camp with a sensor boosted HIC on every gate etc etc. Unless you live deep in Alliance space I would say you make less money belt ratting in 0.0 as opposed to running missions in lowsec. You have to be pretty brain dead to get ganked in a mission in lowsec. Just scan for probes every 2-3 minutes and you're laughing. Use a scout before jumping through a gate etc etc, as opposed to SSing and cloaking every time you get a neut in local. Assumption of Risk
Larkonis Trassler Neo Spartans	Posted - 2008.08.26 17:47:00 - [97] Originally by: Towan Li You want carebears and mission runners to move to low or no-sec? Two words: Implant Insurance. You have to be pretty brain dead to lose a pod in lowsec. Assumption of Risk
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.26 17:48:00 - [98] Originally by: Ruze Originally by: Venkul Mul Originally by: Dave Davies The Concord Tax would be a 15% tax leveed on all mission rewards and pirate bounties paid out in systems where Concord operates, as well as on all minerals refined in those same systems. Maybe there could be a skill that reduces (but doesn't eliminate) the Concord Tax, but not Accounting -- IMO it would need to be something like a Rank 8 trade skill that required a certain level of Corp Management as a prerequisite in addition to the usual Trade prereqs. Just to put it out, that will be the start of the hyperinflation people fear. 15% refine tax and then 15% tax on selling the minerals = 72% of the precedent returns for the same time mining. To get the same quantity of isk from mining miners would increase price by 39%. Then ship builders, to get the same return from ships will apply another 15% increase, for a minimum increase of ship cost by 60%. Tritanium and the other bulky low ends would still not come from low sec as transportation cost more than 15% in time and risk. Ship production will not move to low sec as moving the ships has the same problems as moving the minerals (bulky and risky). All the other stuff will increase in price following the same logic. Still not sure what's wrong with that. Those who produce in losec and nulsec would have far more freedom AND profit, while submitting themselves to far more risk and effort. The market as it is now is riding the bare backs of production costs. Good thing for the buyers, horrible for the seller. However, with this 'buffer zone' in place, those who are willing to put their neck and their BPO's and BPC's on the line by traveling to a back-alley system that is 'supposedly' crawling with pirates, will be able to build and market to hisec costs, getting a quick and powerful boost in profit potential. As far as 'paying too much' is concerned, I'm sure you were around a year or even two ago, when T2 items were far and away more expensive than named, and battleships were a real investment for many players under a year old. I was around 2 years ago when the ships were priced around 60% more and I recall perfectly the work I did to get the first BS. I even feel that that was the "right" price, well above insurance cost (that price would even remove the need for the proposed insurance change). But there is a catch: that price will create a huge gap between the have (people that had the leisure to accumulate capital up to today) to the have not (new player of players finding themselves impoverished by the collapse of a alliance/corporation). As an abrupt change (from nothing to 15% tax) it is very strong. Then again it can be circumvented if you have the contacts and knowledge (direct trade, contracts) while new players would be struck with it. A 5% tax on commerce and bounties (not refining as refining and then selling would hit minerals twice) could even be implemented, 15% is very high.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.26 18:01:00 - [99] Originally by: Larkonis Trassler This perpetrated by the myths that all pirates dishonour ransoms, there is a camp with a sensor boosted HIC on every gate etc etc. Unless you live deep in Alliance space I would say you make less money belt ratting in 0.0 as opposed to running missions in lowsec. You have to be pretty brain dead to get ganked in a mission in lowsec. Just scan for probes every 2-3 minutes and you're laughing. Use a scout before jumping through a gate etc etc, as opposed to SSing and cloaking every time you get a neut in local. Enough pirates dishonor ransom to make it a losing proposition to pay it. There are enough gatecamps in low sec, especially in the entry point, to make it plenty unsafe. Gatecamps are less now simply because targets are less than a year ago, but they will pick up if the traffic was to increase. I make more isk ratting in Delve than running missions and delve is not alliance owned space. Scan every 2-3 minutes for probes and you will be safe. Can I say total untruth? I don't know if you are lacking informations on probing or you are saying a lie on purpose, but a good scanner with prepared bookmark will get you unless you hit the scan button every 30 seconds and you are very fast to find the probes within the tons of junk on the directional scanner (as it is not possible to filter for probes).
Larkonis Trassler Neo Spartans	Posted - 2008.08.26 18:15:00 - [100] Originally by: Venkul Mul Originally by: Larkonis Trassler This perpetrated by the myths that all pirates dishonour ransoms, there is a camp with a sensor boosted HIC on every gate etc etc. Unless you live deep in Alliance space I would say you make less money belt ratting in 0.0 as opposed to running missions in lowsec. You have to be pretty brain dead to get ganked in a mission in lowsec. Just scan for probes every 2-3 minutes and you're laughing. Use a scout before jumping through a gate etc etc, as opposed to SSing and cloaking every time you get a neut in local. Enough pirates dishonor ransom to make it a losing proposition to pay it. There are enough gatecamps in low sec, especially in the entry point, to make it plenty unsafe. Gatecamps are less now simply because targets are less than a year ago, but they will pick up if the traffic was to increase. I make more isk ratting in Delve than running missions and delve is not alliance owned space. Scan every 2-3 minutes for probes and you will be safe. Can I say total untruth? I don't know if you are lacking informations on probing or you are saying a lie on purpose, but a good scanner with prepared bookmark will get you unless you hit the scan button every 30 seconds and you are very fast to find the probes within the tons of junk on the directional scanner (as it is not possible to filter for probes). ZZZZZZZZ The lights appear to be on but nobody is home. Yes you can theoretically scan out a mission runner in 30 seconds. Have you ever tried to probe a mission runner in deadspace with a non exploration probe? It takes a long time and a lot of luck. But I digress. I find it pretty easy to scan for probes even with lots of junk on scan, stop perpetrating these myths. If more players move into lowsec then they will deal with the pirate problem on their own, or so I hope. A lot of pirates I've encountered (myself included I am afraid to say) will not engage a gang if they doubt they can win with few or zero losses on their side. Gate is camped? Rustle up a posse and go and break it up. Nano *** them, keep them pinned on the gates with fast long range tacklers, generally harrass their camps. This is after all a massively multiplayer game. I used to be anti pirate and I'd like to say we did a pretty good job of keeping our pocket clean. We had intel channels the works, every time someone who was a flashy red appeared in local we'd all form up a gang and chase him out. That community spirit is gone now, everyone is lost in the grind. Assumption of Risk
Takon Orlani Caldari Chaos Monkeys Monkey Religion	Posted - 2008.08.26 18:18:00 - [101] Originally by: Verx Interis Taxing someone a lot of money if they're over 3 months old and in an NPC corp is something I thought of but never said much about. This is a solution, also breaks up ISK farmers. I think the tax In NPC corp should be more like 30% to get you to leave ASAP.
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.26 18:21:00 - [102] You can't FORCE a player to leave hisec. And you can't FORCE a player to stop choosing to be a victim. Doing either will just cause them to quit. But providing incentives for those players who aren't happy to be victimized by others, for those with adventurous spirit and who just want to live and do missions (people like me! /stands proudly) and enjoy the company of corp mates? There's multiple ways of going about that. This post only covers one of them, and I personally think it's the most 'fair', and is aimed at multiple issues and small imbalances, while other suggestions (nerfing missions only, moving level 4 missions, boosting losec) are far more prone to being imbalanced in and of themselves. Quote: If you like playing EvE, but don't like to PvP ... Maybe it's time you recognize that you don't really like to play EvE.
Clair Bear Coalition of Nations Free Trade Zone.	Posted - 2008.08.26 18:29:00 - [103] And furthermore... If you're going to put in the effort to hold space, why hold craptastical lowsec space? Head on in and grab space that's worth having! To hold ANY space you'll need to be able to outblob your opponents at least 3 to 1 when required. So you'd need many active players in all time zones. But wait, someone with lots of SP in mining and industry is probably not going to have 9M sp in gunnery, 5M in drones, 2M each in engineering, electronics, mechanic and 5M in spaceship command to fly the counter to the current FOTM. So at least quadruple the required member count for the industrialists to carry the combat types. You can rapidly see how you'd need about a 800+ man corp to secure a constellation, with the industrial wing subsidizing the pvp wing -- EXACTLY how a space holding alliance functions! And even then a logoffski or lucky solo pirate in a crusier can wreck 200M+ of mining ship anyway. Or play docking games with you forever. Throw in the lack of bubbles and/or cyno jammers plus fragility of mining barges and you can rapidly see how lowsec becomes far far far * FAR * --=> FAR <=-- less appealing than deep 0.0 to an industrial corp.
Dave Davies	Posted - 2008.08.26 18:51:00 - [104] Originally by: Venkul Mul 15% refine tax and then 15% tax on selling the minerals I didn't propose a hiked sales tax. I thought about it, but it's already more profitable to sell in low sec than it is in high sec so that part of it isn't broken in my view. ----- Pop Quiz ----- Can you tell me what's wrong with this sentence.
Christari Zuborov Amarr Ore Mongers Black Hand.	Posted - 2008.08.26 18:58:00 - [105] Originally by: Ruze You can't FORCE a player to leave hisec. And you can't FORCE a player to stop choosing to be a victim. Doing either will just cause them to quit. But providing incentives for those players who aren't happy to be victimized by others, for those with adventurous spirit and who just want to live and do missions (people like me! /stands proudly) and enjoy the company of corp mates? There's multiple ways of going about that. This post only covers one of them, and I personally think it's the most 'fair', and is aimed at multiple issues and small imbalances, while other suggestions (nerfing missions only, moving level 4 missions, boosting losec) are far more prone to being imbalanced in and of themselves. I completely agree. I've said this several times over the last couple of years, and it has just got worse and worse. Those who are willing to take the risk, should earn more money. I want to mine/build in low/null sec, but you just can't compete given the risk that I take. Hi sec players can undersell to the point of putting null sec players into the red, and can still enjoying a meager profit even if you were to exclude losses! A 30-50% tax across the board for hi sec refining and building, and an additional 20-40% tax for NPC players are what's required.
Piru Industrial	Posted - 2008.08.26 19:20:00 - [106] no taxation w/o representation. - The ISK must flow..
Drunk Driver Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.26 19:53:00 - [107] I'm against anything that forces people to present themselves for ganking. This idea is passive and doesn't force them into dangerous areas. No force, just incentive to try low sec/0.0. If you're a carebear and want to stay safe, then pay the price and do nothing. If you're more adventuresome and willing to gamble to earn a larger profit then give low sec a try. I think Ruze/Dave Davies may have stumbled onto something worth looking into. .
Sergeant Spot Black Eclipse Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.08.26 20:20:00 - [108] This is just another stupid idea to try and force empire carebears to choose between poverty and being a suicide monkey. Play nice while you butcher each other.
Clair Bear Coalition of Nations Free Trade Zone.	Posted - 2008.08.26 20:28:00 - [109] Originally by: Sergeant Spot This is just another stupid idea to try and force empire carebears to choose between poverty and being a suicide monkey. Third choice: move to 0.0 to fill up alliance held space. Admit it, deep down inside you want a smorgasbord of a 0.0 market. You want all the convenience of Jita in every region. You want all that bonus rent ISK flowing like a firehose into your PvP divisions. On second thought, you already have this. But the Other Guys don't. Give in and support this idea. You know it's right.
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.08.26 20:34:00 - [110] Originally by: Clair Bear Originally by: Sergeant Spot This is just another stupid idea to try and force empire carebears to choose between poverty and being a suicide monkey. Third choice: move to 0.0 to fill up alliance held space. Admit it, deep down inside you want a smorgasbord of a 0.0 market. You want all the convenience of Jita in every region. You want all that bonus rent ISK flowing like a firehose into your PvP divisions. On second thought, you already have this. But the Other Guys don't. Give in and support this idea. You know it's right. That's funny. And aimed at the person who is constantly trying to frame every discussion as a 'pirate revenge' thread at that. Hehehehe ... Quote: If you like playing EvE, but don't like to PvP ... Maybe it's time you recognize that you don't really like to play EvE.
SPIONKOP Caldari PIZZALUVERS	Posted - 2008.08.26 21:23:00 - [111] Originally by: Clair Bear Originally by: Sergeant Spot This is just another stupid idea to try and force empire carebears to choose between poverty and being a suicide monkey. Third choice: move to 0.0 to fill up alliance held space. Admit it, deep down inside you want a smorgasbord of a 0.0 market. You want all the convenience of Jita in every region. You want all that bonus rent ISK flowing like a firehose into your PvP divisions. On second thought, you already have this. But the Other Guys don't. Give in and support this idea. You know it's right. What a great idea. Lets all move to 0.0 space and at the same time lets give the small minority of the alliance(s) leadership more ISK so they can go and buy more uber characters, build the best ships for their own use and pay for their GTC. NO. --------------------------------------------- Space For Rent. 100mil ISK/Week.
Rhatar Khurin Minmatar Native Freshfood	Posted - 2008.08.26 21:26:00 - [112] Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 26/08/2008 05:08:56 99% corporate tax in NPC corps. Permanently move a large quantity of High Sec ore out of High Sec. And then on top of that do what the OP suggests. Slash and burn tbh. Are you serious? That's a terrible idea. How would any new player makes any money?
Clair Bear Coalition of Nations Free Trade Zone.	Posted - 2008.08.26 22:06:00 - [113] Originally by: SPIONKOP What a great idea. Lets all move to 0.0 space and at the same time lets give the small minority of the alliance(s) leadership more ISK so they can go and buy more uber characters, build the best ships for their own use and pay for their GTC. NO. You don't get it, do you? Unlike empire carebear corps a viable 0.0 entity can't prey on its members like that for long. And stay alive. Alliances need pilots; pilots don't need alliances. The lion's share of the ISK collected will be funneled into operations. If it's hoarded by the leadership the alliance will die to other alliances better managed. And if the heads keep some for services rendered (and herding cats is a huge service) I'm fine with that. Anyone smart enough and motivated enough to keep a top tier alliance going could outcarebear you in an instant if that was their interest.
Turin Caldari Eternity INC. Project Alice.	Posted - 2008.08.26 22:50:00 - [114] Originally by: Larkonis Trassler Originally by: Turin Originally by: Larkonis Trassler This is exactly the sort of wrong attitude. If you want a piece of lowsec get together with some friends (this is an MMORPG after all) and go and drive the pirates out. You have sentries on your side (no small ships to bother you). If you fight hard enough then the pirates will: Stop bothering you, strike a deal or move out. A bit of community spirit goes a long way. You are wrong on every level, and let me tell you why. First of all, pirates never go away. Unless you beat the snot out of them over and over and over. And when they do, another group just moves in. And even if you "strike" a deal with them. Odds are they wont honor it... Hello!?!? Pirates?!?!?!? HELLO!?!!? MORON. I have accepted protection money and never backed down, even with freighters coming through and caps a plenty. It's a funny attitude I see among a lot of Eve players. If a bully kicks sand in their face they go off and whine, they don't seek to get even. Idle threats aside. I'm not hiding the fact that I want more targets. But currently lowsec is pretty rubbish and in serious need of a buff. At the same time empire dwellers are raking in a very large amount of isk at low risk. I would like to see lowsec as a stepping ground for corps, pvp and industry before making the jump to 0.0 alliance stuff, right now there is no incentive for this at all. There is a reasonable amount of profit in living in lowsec but very few people are willing to get their act together and defend their space. This perpetrated by the myths that all pirates dishonour ransoms, there is a camp with a sensor boosted HIC on every gate etc etc. Unless you live deep in Alliance space I would say you make less money belt ratting in 0.0 as opposed to running missions in lowsec. You have to be pretty brain dead to get ganked in a mission in lowsec. Just scan for probes every 2-3 minutes and you're laughing. Use a scout before jumping through a gate etc etc, as opposed to SSing and cloaking every time you get a neut in local. did I call you names? Was that really warrented? I think not. But your post is still a whine, and I refuse to take it as anything else. The irony here, is your whining about whiners. So it makes me take you even less seriously. I have been on both sides, and in my dealings with pirates, I have found about 80% of them to be less than honorable. Most pirates I know, do NOT pirate for money and loot. They pirate to grief and try and make the game as crap as they can for the carebears. I would put you in this catagory. Now, I live a little of both worlds. I have never been a pirate myself, but I have plenty of friends who are. Most of them would take protection money and then turn around and backstab them anyways... HELLO!!!!! PIRATE!!!!!! So, your post is a bunch of crap. You simply want to force people into the gameplay YOU want. You have no concern for ANYONE ELSES gameplay. I guess that simply makes you selfish and immature. Go back to mommy whiner boy, and cry some more on her shoulder. While I agree with you, Lowsec is rubbish, I dont see how it can be fixed. It is ALREADY POSSIBLE to make more money in lowsec than highsec. If a person in Lowsec could operate with as much freedom as they can in empire, they would make FAR FAR more money. You know WHY people choose not to do that though? Because its not safe. Because they will generally loose far more than they can gain, or at least break close to even because of... you guessed it. pirates. Lowsec will never be the majority EVE playground. Get over it. And stop name calling, it makes you look like a 2 year old.
Turin Caldari Eternity INC. Project Alice.	Posted - 2008.08.26 22:51:00 - [115] Originally by: Larkonis Trassler Originally by: Towan Li You want carebears and mission runners to move to low or no-sec? Two words: Implant Insurance. You have to be pretty brain dead to lose a pod in lowsec. appearantly you are not familier with HICS. Show some more ignorance.
Larkonis Trassler Neo Spartans	Posted - 2008.08.26 23:16:00 - [116] Originally by: Turin Originally by: Larkonis Trassler Originally by: Towan Li You want carebears and mission runners to move to low or no-sec? Two words: Implant Insurance. You have to be pretty brain dead to lose a pod in lowsec. appearantly you are not familier with HICS. Show some more ignorance. Apparantly you have spent too long in 0.0 putting your rather large amount of assets on the line. Bubbles don't work in lowsec. PROTIP: As your ship is dying select a celestial object and spam warp to button. Your pod will instawarp. If more people were compelled to go to lowsec pirates would have more to deal with than just another solo mission runner etc etc. You are missing my point. Assumption of Risk
Clair Bear Coalition of Nations Free Trade Zone.	Posted - 2008.08.26 23:20:00 - [117] Originally by: Turin While I agree with you, Lowsec is rubbish, I dont see how it can be fixed. It is ALREADY POSSIBLE to make more money in lowsec than highsec. If a person in Lowsec could operate with as much freedom as they can in empire, they would make FAR FAR more money. That's the big 'if.' As is the markets in lowsec have unbelievably low volume. Sure, the per unit profit margins are great. But so what -- I prefer 5% x 1000 units in empire over 300% x 1 unit in lowsec. And so do plenty of other people. And if you're talking about missioning or mining -- mining is LESS profitable because most of the rocks in the belt are poo and LP is a tiny drop in the bucket of the entire mission payout.
Clair Bear Coalition of Nations Free Trade Zone.	Posted - 2008.08.26 23:27:00 - [118] Originally by: Larkonis Trassler If more people were compelled to go to lowsec pirates would have more to deal with than just another solo mission runner etc etc. You are missing my point. And you are missing mine. So far not a SINGLE reason has been given for people to line up to be ganked in lowsec. Every reason is more valid for joining an alliance. lowsec is a desolate pirate infested wonderland. It doesn't need transmogrification into nullsec lite. If the rewards aren't significantly better than 0.0 (to compensate for higher risk) the population will remain low. If they are significantly better you'll see 0.0 entities moving in. You think you want to have good fights vs a 10 man corp, but you may change your tune when you're fighting several 1000-2000 pilot alliances at once even without bubbles.
Somealt Ofmine	Posted - 2008.08.26 23:30:00 - [119] 1. It's a massive isk sink. 2. It would accelerate the economy's tendency toward deflation. 3. It does not address the fact that low-sec is riskier and harder to defend than big-alliance-cum-napfest 0.0 Why does everyone look at high sec as the bane of low sec? Ever think that a big piece of the problem is that 0.0 has grown more stable, and less risky, as the game matures? If you provide big incentives to jump out of high sec, any player with two brain-cells to rub together isn't going to go be pirate food. They'll join up with one of the many fine 0.0 corporations who are crying for people to come mine their high-grades and farm their faction rats in space that is safer than your typical .4 system. Low-sec deserves to be dead, tbh. Until the mechanics change to make it easier to defend, and less risky than 0.0, no amount of high-sec nerfing is going to make it an attractive alternative to 0.0.
Slade Trillgon Siorai Iontach	Posted - 2008.08.26 23:46:00 - [120] Edited by: Slade Trillgon on 26/08/2008 23:48:35 Edited by: Slade Trillgon on 26/08/2008 23:47:39 Originally by: techzer0 Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 26/08/2008 05:08:56 99% corporate tax in NPC corps. Permanently move a large quantity of High Sec ore out of High Sec. And then on top of that do what the OP suggests. Slash and burn tbh. Move the Ice. Kill the lvl 4 rewards in safe-space (I run 4s instead of ratting 0.0, less hassle, and I still disagree with it) etc etc... This is fun, more ideas to kill highsec Others have said stop T1 drops...this would help in 2 fashions. Mineral prices for the miners goes up across the board and this makes T1 industry open up (theoretically). YOu stop the infusion of T1 modules a demand from the player base will still be there, then all those T1 BP's end up being profit makers. Someone said that taxing NPC Corp pilots real high would just make alot of one man corps pop up. This is the point. They are now acountable for themselves and can be wardecked. The way it is supposed to be in EVE. Do these to nerf high sec... - Tax NPC corp pilots heavily - Take combat level 4 mission agents all to low sec - Remove T1 loot dropage in game To represent the concept that resources are typically depleted in areas of heavy population. Do the following to boost low sec... - Move all ice to low sec - Move all mid-range ore to low sec - Reduce all asteroid belt numbers and densities throughout high sec space. These are just some of the points made earlier that I thought would boost cooperation, boost certain aspects in the game, and nerf one area that is arguably much more profitable then it should be; even in a role playing sense. Slade DesuSigs
Larkonis Trassler Neo Spartans	Posted - 2008.08.26 23:56:00 - [121] Originally by: Slade Trillgon Edited by: Slade Trillgon on 26/08/2008 23:48:35 Edited by: Slade Trillgon on 26/08/2008 23:47:39 Originally by: techzer0 Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 26/08/2008 05:08:56 99% corporate tax in NPC corps. Permanently move a large quantity of High Sec ore out of High Sec. And then on top of that do what the OP suggests. Slash and burn tbh. Move the Ice. Kill the lvl 4 rewards in safe-space (I run 4s instead of ratting 0.0, less hassle, and I still disagree with it) etc etc... This is fun, more ideas to kill highsec Others have said stop T1 drops...this would help in 2 fashions. Mineral prices for the miners goes up across the board and this makes T1 industry open up (theoretically). YOu stop the infusion of T1 modules a demand from the player base will still be there, then all those T1 BP's end up being profit makers. Someone said that taxing NPC Corp pilots real high would just make alot of one man corps pop up. This is the point. They are now acountable for themselves and can be wardecked. The way it is supposed to be in EVE. Do these to nerf high sec... - Tax NPC corp pilots heavily - Take combat level 4 mission agents all to low sec - Remove T1 loot dropage in game To represent the concept that resources are typically depleted in areas of heavy population. Do the following to boost low sec... - Move all ice to low sec - Move all mid-range ore to low sec - Reduce all asteroid belt numbers and densities throughout high sec space. These are just some of the points made earlier that I thought would boost cooperation, boost certain aspects in the game, and nerf one area that is arguably much more profitable then it should be; even in a role playing sense. Slade My bold. Moving all the Ice to lowsec would have a knock on effect (positive one at that) of making caps A LOT more expensive to run and thus we'd see them used less widely. The other changes would also be somewhat of a final solution the the farmer problem. At least in hisec, no real way to deal with the 0.0 Alliances renting out their space, but I digress. Assumption of Risk
Dave Davies	Posted - 2008.08.27 00:22:00 - [122] Originally by: Somealt Ofmine 1. It's a massive isk sink. Partly. It's also a material sink in the shape of the refine tax. People would dodge that by refining in low sec, but the resulting splosions might be enough to offset the loophole. Quote: 2. It would accelerate the economy's tendency toward deflation. The part of it that's only an ISK sink would, sure. Quote: 3. It does not address the fact that low-sec is riskier and harder to defend than big-alliance-cum-napfest 0.0 You don't have to "own" the space to exploit it. That's the business model in nullsec, sure, but it need not apply to low sec. You'd need killer logistics and the ability to keep a system quiet for a few hours at a time. Quote: Why does everyone look at high sec as the bane of low sec? Ever think that a big piece of the problem is that 0.0 has grown more stable, and less risky, as the game matures? Sure, that's part of the problem. But as long as we're calling misconceptions out, why does everybody assume that the call to nerf high sec has something to do with "punishment" or deprecation? I don't see high sec as evil, I acknowledge that it plays an important role in the game... but I do see it is somewhat overvalued at the present time. I don't want to smite high sec with the Two- Fisted Cudgel of Righteous Vengeance, I just want to see it brought in line with the age- old video game principle that tougher bosses net you more points. That's all. Quote: If you provide big incentives to jump out of high sec, any player with two brain-cells to rub together isn't going to go be pirate food. They'll join up with one of the many fine 0.0 corporations who are crying for people to come mine their high-grades and farm their faction rats in space that is safer than your typical .4 system. Yeah, [intercourse] small business anyway. If you're not one of the big conglomerates there shouldn't be a place for you in this game. ----- Pop Quiz ----- Can you tell me what's wrong with this sentence.
Empyre Domestic Reform	Posted - 2008.08.27 04:15:00 - [123] I just made 109m isk in a single market transaction. Clearly the market is where the trouble is. Let's nerf marketing so that no single transaction can profit more than 50m. It only makes sense. People getting rich while I have to search desperately for targets like everyone has always done in Eve because no one 1v1 or fights in balanced encounters. This is not fair and it has to stop. Destroy all that which is evil, so that which is good may flourish.
Sanzorz Amarr EVEfan.dk	Posted - 2008.08.27 05:16:00 - [124] Originally by: Larkonis Trassler Apparantly you have spent too long in 0.0 putting your rather large amount of assets on the line. Bubbles don't work in lowsec. PROTIP: As your ship is dying select a celestial object and spam warp to button. Your pod will instawarp. If more people were compelled to go to lowsec pirates would have more to deal with than just another solo mission runner etc etc. You are missing my point. Wow, what a great selfpwned reply. I'm a carebear and I know the bloody difference between a HIC and a Dictor. You better just check up on HIC ability for lowsec before you reply again...

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one 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.