These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Citadels] Changing NPC taxes

First post
Author
Anhenka
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#401 - 2016-03-05 15:00:43 UTC
Kaivar Lancer wrote:
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Yup. But dumb mechanic remains dumb.


But your going to need better points or it just hurts the argument

There are 20 pages of reasons why the tax and clone cost are bad. If they really need more reasons after that, there's something wrong.


LOL, the Reddit thread had over 1000 replies within 12 hours. The response was overwhelmingly negative.


The response on clone jumps costs was largely negative, but the trading cost part has mostly been 3-4 people yelling very loudly, constantly.

That doesn't make an overwhelming negative, unless you are talking US politics.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#402 - 2016-03-05 15:05:07 UTC
Kaivar Lancer wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:


If you're really that worried that your beloved market hub will be decced, then why not help defend it?


A citadel owner may decide to play another game. Or he might have a stroke and go to hospital. Or he might go on a vacation. Whatever the case, the citadel will run out of fuel eventually and I'm looking at 600+ orders vanishing into thin air, and a 10% bill on my assets. There's no "defence" against that. (maybe this is something that CCP can look at, allowing citadel residents to contribute fuel)


If you want the extra security pay the extra tax
Lugh Crow-Slave
#403 - 2016-03-05 15:06:05 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
Kaivar Lancer wrote:
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Yup. But dumb mechanic remains dumb.


But your going to need better points or it just hurts the argument

There are 20 pages of reasons why the tax and clone cost are bad. If they really need more reasons after that, there's something wrong.


LOL, the Reddit thread had over 1000 replies within 12 hours. The response was overwhelmingly negative.


The response on clone jumps costs was largely negative, but the trading cost part has mostly been 3-4 people yelling very loudly, constantly.

That doesn't make an overwhelming negative, unless you are talking US politics.


This is one of the main issues with putting to many topics into one thread
Lugh Crow-Slave
#404 - 2016-03-05 15:27:27 UTC
Also just because there is no npc counterpart compression should be taxable in some cases it is a far more valuable tool than refining at the very least we should be able to lock access to it without locking access to reefing
Excellion
Nexus Mercator
#405 - 2016-03-05 15:37:44 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
The response on clone jumps costs was largely negative, but the trading cost part has mostly been 3-4 people yelling very loudly, constantly. That doesn't make an overwhelming negative, unless you are talking US politics.


Lets consider me writing a dev post, containing two propositions:
- In the next patch, Jita will be deleted to stimulate trading elsewhere.
- In the next patch, the Omist region will be deleted because reasons.

Even though Omist contains what, 20 systems, what would receive the larger response? Jita of course. I'm never in Omist, why would i bother commenting on it being deleted? The same applies to jump clones and trading. Virtually everyone uses jump clones but only a small subset of the player base is primarily involved in station trading. Just imagine the response we would get if CCP announced they would (temporally) nerf dreads in an attempt to have more fighter carriers deployed to test the new mechanics. Would i care? Nope. Would a group of other people care for rather valid reasons? Yes.

On the whole, Citadels can be interesting and perhaps eventually lucrative for trading. But it would be a lot more convenient if those things were actually build and given a change to settle in before simply throwing game mechanics around to enforce them.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#406 - 2016-03-05 15:41:14 UTC
Excellion wrote:
Anhenka wrote:
The response on clone jumps costs was largely negative, but the trading cost part has mostly been 3-4 people yelling very loudly, constantly. That doesn't make an overwhelming negative, unless you are talking US politics.


Lets consider me writing a dev post, containing two propositions:
- In the next patch, Jita will be deleted to stimulate trading elsewhere.
- In the next patch, the Omist region will be deleted because reasons.

Even though Omist contains what, 20 systems, what would receive the larger response? Jita of course. I'm never in Omist, why would i bother commenting on it being deleted? The same applies to jump clones and trading. Virtually everyone uses jump clones but only a small subset of the player base is primarily involved in station trading. Just imagine the response we would get if CCP announced they would (temporally) nerf dreads in an attempt to have more fighter carriers deployed to test the new mechanics. Would i care? Nope. Would a group of other people care for rather valid reasons? Yes.

On the whole, Citadels can be interesting and perhaps eventually lucrative for trading. But it would be a lot more convenient if those things were actually build and given a change to settle in before simply throwing game mechanics around to enforce them.


Yet everyone is involved with Staton trading to some extent and station trading isn't getting removed just getting nerfed
Algarion Getz
Aideron Corp
#407 - 2016-03-05 16:01:27 UTC
5m clone cost, increased market and contract tax ... wtf CCP

Don't force players to use certain features by making artifcial benefits. You always emphasize that EVE is a sandbox and players can do what they want. Now you force us to use POSes if we want to stay competetive. Guess what? Im not interested in POSes. I never was. I prefer a nomadic lifestyle.

Every year EVE gets more rules, more restrictions, more leveling of ships, etc. I don't like this trend.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#408 - 2016-03-05 16:05:06 UTC
Algarion Getz wrote:
5m clone cost, increased market and contract tax ... wtf CCP

Don't force players to use certain features by making artifcial benefits. You always emphasize that EVE is a sandbox and players can do what they want. Now you force us to use POSes if we want to stay competetive. Guess what? Im not interested in POSes. I never was. I prefer a nomadic lifestyle.

Every year EVE gets more rules, more restrictions, more leveling of ships, etc. I don't like this trend.


It's just a way of making the world more player generated nothing is forcing you to use any of these features they are just adding a con to go with the pros of using npc stations
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
CK-0FF
#409 - 2016-03-05 16:05:49 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
Kaivar Lancer wrote:
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Yup. But dumb mechanic remains dumb.


But your going to need better points or it just hurts the argument

There are 20 pages of reasons why the tax and clone cost are bad. If they really need more reasons after that, there's something wrong.


LOL, the Reddit thread had over 1000 replies within 12 hours. The response was overwhelmingly negative.


The response on clone jumps costs was largely negative, but the trading cost part has mostly been 3-4 people yelling very loudly, constantly.

That doesn't make an overwhelming negative, unless you are talking US politics.

Just to be sure, I went back and checked the number of unique names. Before getting tired I got to about 90 different people saying negative things about the brokers fee and tax increases. I encourage you to go find only 3-4 specific people yelling loudly.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#410 - 2016-03-05 16:08:50 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Yup. But dumb mechanic remains dumb.


But your going to need better points or it just hurts the argument



I and others already posted them.

The crux of mine is trying to assign an equal value to a mod in every area of space is both pointless and foolhardy.

Why do CCP even think it's possible to make the like of wormholers and highseccers find the same value in the clone mod? It's ludicrous.

To suggest that it's a bad thing if areas of space don't use certain mods or view them with the same value is bad enough (remember slots/structure are limited), but to then add a stick to try and make people conform is flat out lunacy.
Algarion Getz
Aideron Corp
#411 - 2016-03-05 16:12:52 UTC
MachineOfLovingGrace wrote:
While I like the idea of more player control about eve, this is moving too far into the regions where other players can effectively control how and where I play eve for my taste. Eve is already a game that is at times as tedious and overcomplicated as it's fun and engaging. The market and jumpclone changes will only make this worse, even more so if you are a casual player without some big alliance logistic backbone. Every change that makes actual gameplay require more logistic/clicks/hassle in general will make casual scrubs like me pause and think if hitting "find game" in CS:GO isn't the better use of my time. Don't lose the "small guy" from focus when you plan some big poweblock endgame.

THIS.
Anhenka
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#412 - 2016-03-05 16:16:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:

Just to be sure, I went back and checked the number of unique names. Before getting tired I got to about 90 different people saying negative things about the brokers fee and tax increases. I encourage you to go find only 3-4 specific people yelling loudly.


There are more than 3-4 people whop disagree with them, but there a disproportionate is coming from a few people.

Kaivar Lancer for example, is 18 posts complaining by himself.
Sgt Ocker, 9 posts
epicurus ataraxia, 10 posts
Scotsman Howard 9 posts

And that's a few notable glances from the pages I posted on.

So yeah, there are a few people yelling loudly, and a lot more grumbling quietly, but we can't look at the vocal outcry of the few and assume everyone hates it, because a forum thread where the loudest people get the most facetime is not a good representation of the opinions of the playerbase.

And all the people who don't care? They are absent. All the people who like it? They mostly don't bother posting. And that's just out of the very small minority of players who actually use this forum.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#413 - 2016-03-05 16:25:43 UTC
@Anhenka

To be fair most don't post here, not even the devs, because reddit is far and away the best places to post feedback these days. I'm just a dinosaur who hangs out here as well.
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#414 - 2016-03-05 17:26:15 UTC  |  Edited by: epicurus ataraxia
deleted and reposted to take account of ninja edit

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE

Lugh Crow-Slave
#415 - 2016-03-05 17:44:01 UTC
Also these changes add a lot more choice when it comes to industry.

Currently of you want to make the most isk you buy the materials for what you want to build build it then sell.

The reason for this is you almost always loss isk building from the ground up on high step builds do to the increased time with little to no extra pay off.

After this change it will be more expensive to buy components that are from higher steps do to reposted inflation from higher brokers fees.

So now your will be able to choose to build from raw materials to completed product in order to by pass repeated frees allowing you to increase your profit margin
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#416 - 2016-03-05 19:53:32 UTC  |  Edited by: epicurus ataraxia
Anhenka wrote:
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:

Just to be sure, I went back and checked the number of unique names. Before getting tired I got to about 90 different people saying negative things about the brokers fee and tax increases. I encourage you to go find only 3-4 specific people yelling loudly.


There are more than 3-4 people whop disagree with them, but there a disproportionate is coming from a few people.

Kaivar Lancer for example, is 18 posts complaining by himself.
Sgt Ocker, 9 posts
epicurus ataraxia, 10 posts
Scotsman Howard 9 posts

And that's a few notable glances from the pages I posted on.

So yeah, there are a few people yelling loudly, and a lot more grumbling quietly, but we can't look at the vocal outcry of the few and assume everyone hates it, because a forum thread where the loudest people get the most facetime is not a good representation of the opinions of the playerbase.

And all the people who don't care? They are absent. All the people who like it? They mostly don't bother posting. And that's just out of the very small minority of players who actually use this forum.



I am really disappointed that although you quoted me you actually have not read a word I have said.
NOT one single word was directly related to the trading aspect, I deliberately avoided that to keep my message clear,

and that message is (simplified for those of a short attention span) that CCP need to make Citadels places people want to be, and not attempt to drive them (unwillingly and resentfully) there at the point of a gun.

But if people do not read, I guess it doesn't matter what I write does it.

Re posted to take account of ninja edit.

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE

Lugh Crow-Slave
#417 - 2016-03-05 20:27:12 UTC
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
Anhenka wrote:
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:

Just to be sure, I went back and checked the number of unique names. Before getting tired I got to about 90 different people saying negative things about the brokers fee and tax increases. I encourage you to go find only 3-4 specific people yelling loudly.


There are more than 3-4 people whop disagree with them, but there a disproportionate is coming from a few people.

Kaivar Lancer for example, is 18 posts complaining by himself.
Sgt Ocker, 9 posts
epicurus ataraxia, 10 posts
Scotsman Howard 9 posts

And that's a few notable glances from the pages I posted on.

So yeah, there are a few people yelling loudly, and a lot more grumbling quietly, but we can't look at the vocal outcry of the few and assume everyone hates it, because a forum thread where the loudest people get the most facetime is not a good representation of the opinions of the playerbase.

And all the people who don't care? They are absent. All the people who like it? They mostly don't bother posting. And that's just out of the very small minority of players who actually use this forum.



I am really disappointed that although you quoted me you actually have not read a word I have said.
NOT one single word was directly related to the trading aspect, I deliberately avoided that to keep my message clear,

and that message is (simplified for those of a short attention span) that CCP need to make Citadels places people want to be, and not attempt to drive them (unwillingly and resentfully) there at the point of a gun.

But if people do not read, I guess it doesn't matter what I write does it.

Re posted to take account of ninja edit.


I think he was more trying to be generous and find people that could at the very least appear to be arguing against the tax increase
Wimzy Chent-Shi
Makronka Company
#418 - 2016-03-05 20:29:14 UTC
Would it be possible to compensate for the market tax changes by further increasing the effect of standings/skills most of traders spent quite a lot of time and effort getting?

Come get some cancer @ my blog !

"This clash of opinions is like cutting onions. We are creating something here, that's productive, ...and then there is also salt." -Wimzy 2016

Lugh Crow-Slave
#419 - 2016-03-05 21:15:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
Wimzy Chent-Shi wrote:
Would it be possible to compensate for the market tax changes by further increasing the effect of standings/skills most of traders spent quite a lot of time and effort getting?


So can we reballance market taxes but make those reballances only effect new players?

Since the effect of skills and standings ate % based the effectiveness is already being increased
Albert Spear
Non scholae sed vitae
#420 - 2016-03-05 21:31:47 UTC
Oh, here is a dumb question.

Will the prices in the Market Modules in the Citadels show up in the regional market window or will they be hidden from the regional market window?