These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
#521 - 2016-03-09 04:56:10 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Niko Zino wrote:
Stuff


Those are fair points we've been discussing internally. Initial figures show us maintaining a cloning bay in a Citadel will cost 157m ISK a month, we wanted to provide means for the owner to recoup that cost and even make a profit in general.


Maybe you should just let them consider it an expense, instead of doing the damage that you're about to do.

Every single service doesn't need to turn a profit for the citadel as a whole to show a profit. Smart owners wlll be willing take a loss on a service if it attracts customers who will provide profit on other services.

You could also, you know, revisit the fuel requirements for the cloning service.

Do not run. We are your friends.

#522 - 2016-03-09 05:44:38 UTC
Tyranis Marcus wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Niko Zino wrote:
Stuff


Those are fair points we've been discussing internally. Initial figures show us maintaining a cloning bay in a Citadel will cost 157m ISK a month, we wanted to provide means for the owner to recoup that cost and even make a profit in general.

You could also, you know, revisit the fuel requirements for the cloning service.

Logic, really, oooh that's scary Blink

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

#523 - 2016-03-09 06:01:15 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
What would your opinion be of a reduction in jump clone costs in proportion to the old jump clone standings requirements. So installing a jump cloning or jumping out of a station where you have 8.0 would result in a 0 isk cost, while jumping from a station where you have 0 standings would be 5 mil isk, and a sliding scale between?

I have a counter-proposal

My proposal. Remove the jump tax from NPC stations, because paywalls between people and accessing content is not a good idea. But I do have an idea to make citadels very important and wanted for jump clone services, without resorting to taxing people for it.

Make medibays relevant again.

One thing that always struck me as odd with jump clones is that you can only install them in stations with medibays, which sometimes can be few and far between. Keyword: sometimes (sometimes you'll have multiple stations in one system with a medibay, but things like that can be modified). But once a jump clone is installed, you can leave it/jump to it anywhere. If you needed a special utility bay (the medibay) to maintain one, why can you just leave it anywhere once it's created?

New system: after reducing the number of stations that have medibays to make them more of a rare commodity, rework the jump clone system so you can only jump away (this is important and I'll explain shortly) from a jump clone if a medibay is in the station. Now, the service you're providing out of citadels is tactical positioning. Citadels, I would argue, can still tax jump clones, but NPC tax clone services would remain to be free, but you have to deal with the fact that you might be far away from your ideal location.

That is a compromise, a compromise worth fighting for, and if done right, worth building for.

Now I said jumping away was important, and here's why. Currently most people probably have jump clones located in areas without a medibay. I certainly moved quite a few clones after installing them. So to make sure the code can handle both the current situation and the new rules, you make the server check for the medibay requirement only when trying to jump away. That way we can all jump to our wandering clones once more, but then we'd have to move them to a station with a medibay to jump away again.

Illusion of Solitude
#524 - 2016-03-09 09:20:10 UTC  |  Edited by: epicurus ataraxia
Terraj Oknatis wrote:


This abrupt 5% hit to station trading is far to harsh. It would be much better to make it a small increase, and creep it up as citadel use becomes more and more mainstream. The current course of action is going to **** off yet another section of the player base, that being the station traders who did nothing to deserve it.

When Delonewolf does his eve talk about the market every week he will now have to consider a 5% tax for station trading. Now he will say, well there is a 10% margin in this market but that is no longer impressive. You would realistically have to start off with at least a 15% margin for each trade to account for the tax. I have been watching D Wolf's show for quite some time and I must confess he rarely ever see a 15%+ margin. So therefore station traders are going to wake up and instantly find that there is no good reason why they should log on. Station trading is a part of the game in which people enjoy, and apparently it is not even safe from the nerf bat.

The other player base this is going to hurt is new players. A big question I have is, how are skills going to effect the tax structure? Is a 5% tax with perfect skills? What If I have zero skills in marketing: Will I have to pay 10%!?!? God forbid I DESTROYED those skills by doing skill trading, oh noes, now they are USEFUL!?!?!?!?

The ideal situation is for Jita to instantly evaporate and be replaced with a citadel offering 1.5% tax, however that is not realistic. This transition will take time, it will also fundamentally change the way we purchase goods in New Eden. Where, realistically, will you find a place where ALL of the goods are found in one place? This can only happen in a big market hub like the 5 that are in the game currently. In that regards Jita will never perish unless the station were destroyed so why make it painful to live there?

So CCP is going to tax Jita out of the market place, but Jita is an important part of the game, and one that will not die easily. This 5% tax is only going to do short term harm to station trading. In the long term, under a perfect situation, where citadels magically appear from the ether, and offer an equal selection of goods, that being all of them, and wherein the citadels remain in a stable enough position for people to develop habits of going to them, there will never be a replacement quite like it. So I ask why then put this imposing tax on goods sold there so abruptly?

There is a solution here but it is not a sudden nerf to the trade hub market place. Honestly, the five major market hubs should get an exemption from this tax increase, at least for the time being.


This is in reality going to be the "gentle start" The problem with using aversion therapy, or negative reinforcement, while training a child, or pet, is that the only option when it does not achieve the desired effect is to increase the pain until you get the behavioural change you are seeking.

Those who do it, In the main do not intend to harm, they justify it by choosing to believe it will work, and a small amount now, will affect the change in behaviour, but it always needs more. It is a Path that is almost impossible to step off, the justifications for increasing the pain and punishment, just become stronger.

NB telling the victim they ARE going to be beaten regardless, and trying to negotiate, how much is required to break them, is not suddenly making the abuser a nice parent.

You then increase the pain until the changed behaviour happens by breaking their will, or you kill or severely damage, the child or pet.Shocked or hopefully child or animal services reach them before you do.

However If you train with "treats" and encouragement, the more you increase the effect to gain the desired affect, the worst damage you can achieve, is a happy well balanced child or pet during the process.

I do not want to go down the rabbit hole with this argument, but this has proved to be a core of human psychology over thousands of years of trial and error, and going the wrong way has caused a great deal of unnecessary suffering and unhappiness.

Behavioural modification by punishment, Has become discredited, and has only remains a tool for those who wish to cause deliberate harm to their subject, for whatever reason, or by those who do not care if they do, or by those who have previously become so damaged by their own childhood abuse, their children and spouses, suffer from the abuse in their turn.

So I ask again, Is this really a good idea?

Please ask CCP Seagull if this is the way you wish to portray yourself as a Company, before this is the way you are seen.

This may be seen as hyperbole, but when you disregard that this is a game for the moment, one sees the core thinking exposed for what it is.

Hopefully It is just a temporary, aberration.

I will not discuss this further, you will be judged by your future comments and actions, hopefully this issue will be resolved, and we never have to discuss it again.

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

Fidelas Constans
#525 - 2016-03-09 11:33:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Vartan Sarkisian
I think that the main issue with the citadels and CCP using the nerfing of NPC stations to try and force people into using them is that whoever controls the citadel controls everyone within it, in some form or another. Consider Jita, according to eve market data the number of selling orders in there is quite high as you would imagine - http://eve-marketdata.com/station.php?step=Rank&solarsystem_name=jita

I don’t think it is unfair to say that people will be unwilling to risk that level of investment after the cost indexes have forced people to move further away to make their items, then the risk and cost that they have getting those items to market to further have risk once they put their orders up on the whim of the citadel owner. So it isn’t even so much about the citadel getting destroyed it is about the controlling group shutting off services for ***** and giggles. all those risks right up to using the citadel are part of the game, that is the bits that make the game interesting and fun. Sticking even just a few billion in orders in a citadel for the risk that the owner of the citadel turns off the services is too much. if anything this will mean that the richest people/alliances already in game will just control the markets as people from the alliance that owns the citadel will be the ones that wont fear anything.

The 5m price for jumping into and out of jump clones is just stupidly ridiculous in every possible scenario, I think that is possibly a game killing option (I know that sounds dramatic), new players especially wont necessarily have the funds to do this, older players would see it as a tax on PVP and possibly pvp less, whilst not as bad as the costs that used to be associated with updating your clones it is heading back in that direction. I think lots of people would kill off/not use clones.
Dead Terrorists
#526 - 2016-03-09 11:40:02 UTC
"Maybe you should just let them consider it an expense, instead of doing the damage that you're about to do.

Every single service doesn't need to turn a profit for the citadel as a whole to show a profit. Smart owners will be willing take a loss on a service if it attracts customers who will provide profit on other services.

You could also, you know, revisit the fuel requirements for the cloning service."

Exactly.

Look at the bigger picture, see how the whole system can work.
Kaivar Lancer
#527 - 2016-03-09 14:15:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaivar Lancer
Obil Que wrote:
Dominous Nolen wrote:
CCP here's a thought... Give us something for the fact you're going to tax us for the NPC stations.


You get perfect safety. Perfect safety is OP and with minimal cost currently. This is being corrected.
NPC stations will have perfect safety with increased cost
Citadels will have risk with reduced costs

It isn't that complicated


Trading isn't "perfect safety". Station traders can still lose ISK if they make incorrect trading decisions. They can lose billions in a single trade, far more than a PVPer in a T1 frig. In fact, trading is zero sum. For a trader to profit, another trader must lose.

For other traders who shuttle goods between stations, you have your high-sec ganks. There's a reason why Uedama is one of the most dangerous systems in high sec. It lies on the most profitable trade routes in Eve.

Only a non-trader would say that tradiing is "perfect safety".
Goonswarm Federation
#528 - 2016-03-09 14:23:53 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Hello people, Team Game of Drones is having a look at the Citadel structures services (reprocessing, clones, market, compression, offices) and we would like to make a few changes that will impact NPC taxes. The goal of such changes is to give more flexibility for Citadel owners to make a profit when charging their services to the public, while making sure they are profitable enough to compete versus NPC station services.


  • Offices in Citadels: unlike renting offices in NPC stations, there will be no office limit in Citadels. As long as you are granted access by the owner there will be no limitation about creating an office there. Office rental will be a flat fee, fixed by the owner. The fee will not have a NPC tax of any sort.

  • Medical clones: we are thinking of keeping the 100,000 ISK fee for changing the home station in a Citadel, just like NPC stations. As long as you have access you will never face an artificial limit to medical clones in Citadels.

  • Jump Clones: current price for installing jump clones in NPC stations is around 100,000 ISK. We are planning to increase that amount to 5m ISK to install a jump clone in NPC stations. That price will also be payable anytime a clone is left behind in a NPC station - so, if you jump clone away from a NPC station from previously established jump clones you will still pay that price. Jump Clones installed in Citadels will not have any NPC taxes, but the owner can charge his own pricing for the service. We also want to remove the maximum limit of jump clones for Citadels: like Citadel offices, your alliance, corporation or public customers will never be denied usage of this service if you grant them access in the first place.

  • Reprocessing: we are thinking of changing the way reprocessing taxes work. Currently, the taxes are expressed in materials, so if you get 100 units of tritanium the system would take 5 for a 5% tax. We would like to change that tax to be payable in ISK only to make it simpler for structure owners to get their fees. This would apply to NPC stations as well and still be reduced by your standings tower the NPC corporation owning the station. In addition, the tax will be properly logged into the transactions part of the journal. Reprocessing taxes inside a Citadel will be left entirely to the owner, no NPC tax will be enforced.

  • Compression: after internal discussion we are planning to merge this service with the reprocessing service module, so you won't need to install two modules in your Citadel to get this functionality. Compression is not going to be taxed because there is no NPC counterpart to compete with (only available in Starbases at the moment).

  • Market: markets currently have two taxes, transaction's tax, applied for sold items, and broker's fee for non immediate orders, which are set at 1.5% and 1% respectively. To create an environment more competitive for Citadels, we plan on increasing the transaction tax to 2.5% and the broker's fee to 5-6%. Players trading in citadels will still receive the transaction tax, but the broker's fee will be at the complete discretion of the owner. To avoid confusion for the owner, the broker relations skill will not affect player set broker's fee in Citadels.

  • Contracts: while Contracts will not be available in Citadels for the first release, the transaction's tax and borker's fee will also go up by the same amount than markets as mentioned above.



Please remember those are still work in progress changes (especially the market broker's fee tax amount), so please use constructive feedback in your replies.



OH MY GOD! Just remoove auto agression on anoms! Its so simple! Stop being bad!
Reckoning Star Alliance
#529 - 2016-03-09 16:07:02 UTC
Kaivar Lancer wrote:
Obil Que wrote:
Dominous Nolen wrote:
CCP here's a thought... Give us something for the fact you're going to tax us for the NPC stations.


You get perfect safety. Perfect safety is OP and with minimal cost currently. This is being corrected.
NPC stations will have perfect safety with increased cost
Citadels will have risk with reduced costs

It isn't that complicated


Trading isn't "perfect safety". Station traders can still lose ISK if they make incorrect trading decisions. They can lose billions in a single trade, far more than a PVPer in a T1 frig. In fact, trading is zero sum. For a trader to profit, another trader must lose.

For other traders who shuttle goods between stations, you have your high-sec ganks. There's a reason why Uedama is one of the most dangerous systems in high sec. It lies on the most profitable trade routes in Eve.

Only a non-trader would say that tradiing is "perfect safety".


Don't be obtuse
I was referring to asset safety which is the "risk" taken when putting your assets in someone else's Citadel and thus the barrier to entry for them.
There is no ability to threaten your assets in an NPC station

Interestingly, CCP Nullarbor clarified on Tweetfleet Slack today that asset recover in the same system is free (zero cost). Seems then that another barrier (potential loss of ISK upon structure death) isn't a problem for systems with Citadels and NPC stations.
#530 - 2016-03-09 16:16:46 UTC
Helpful info, thanks for the update.

Don't explain your philosophy. Embody it.

Dead Terrorists
#531 - 2016-03-09 16:29:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Rob Kaichin
Obil Que wrote:


Don't be obtuse
I was referring to asset safety which is the "risk" taken when putting your assets in someone else's Citadel and thus the barrier to entry for them.
There is no ability to threaten your assets in an NPC station



Yeah, we all remember how BoB lived through a 'hell' camp and nothing could be done to dislodge them from Delve,.

Long Live BoB, Long Live Molle... Oh wait. Assets in NPC stations can still be denied, which is a risk, no?

This is a bigger issue than getting your assets out from a Citadel after it's been destroyed: the risk that the Citadel owner locks you away from your assets permanently: the very thing which makes player in Nullsec quit (c.f. Brave's number of inactives in Fountain and post Fountain).

This is a mechanic which is known to cause players to unsubscribe, and now it will be entirely possibly in Highsec.

Look, CCP, what kind of game do you want people to play in Highsec? Sugar spent years developing the idea that Low-sec wasn't just Null-sec lite, and that there were differences between each area of space people chose to play in. It feels to me that, now Mike and Sugar are leaving, you're forgetting all the valuable things they've tried to teach you.
Reckoning Star Alliance
#532 - 2016-03-09 16:52:31 UTC
Rob Kaichin wrote:
Obil Que wrote:


Don't be obtuse
I was referring to asset safety which is the "risk" taken when putting your assets in someone else's Citadel and thus the barrier to entry for them.
There is no ability to threaten your assets in an NPC station



Yeah, we all remember how BoB lived through a 'hell' camp and nothing could be done to dislodge them from Delve,.

Long Live BoB, Long Live Molle... Oh wait. Assets in NPC stations can still be denied, which is a risk, no?

This is a bigger issue than getting your assets out from a Citadel after it's been destroyed: the risk that the Citadel owner locks you away from your assets permanently: the very thing which makes player in Nullsec quit (c.f. Brave's number of inactives in Fountain and post Fountain).

This is a mechanic which is known to cause players to unsubscribe, and now it will be entirely possibly in Highsec.

Look, CCP, what kind of game do you want people to play in Highsec? Sugar spent years developing the idea that Low-sec wasn't just Null-sec lite, and that there were differences between each area of space people chose to play in. It feels to me that, now Mike and Sugar are leaving, you're forgetting all the valuable things they've tried to teach you.


Asset recovery can be triggered by the user at any time
So in the case where you are "locked out" you have the option to move your assets to the nearest NPC station just as if the Citadel was destroyed.

Your null scenario is not an issue. In null-sec you may have a fee associated, but in HS this is a no cost option.
Dead Terrorists
#533 - 2016-03-09 16:58:51 UTC
Obil Que wrote:


Asset recovery can be triggered by the user at any time



Seriously? What kind of sense does that even make? Where was this announced?
#534 - 2016-03-09 17:21:07 UTC
Clone Jump Fees: I can see the reasoning behind their introduction, even though I may not like the proposed method. After all, it allows you to travel from one end of the cluster to another instantly and in total safety, lets you gain the advantages of high-value learning implants without risking them should you wish to PvP, etc. Such advantages should have a price attached.

How about a "storage cost" instead of a jump fee? Say 1M + (1% of implant market value) ISK per month for each clone, so easily within the reach of newbros who just want to jump around to experience content, but more meaningful (though still trivial compared to the benefits) for the veteran mini-maxers who swap between +5s, Slaves, Ascensions and full Industry sets every other day.

But rather than having a monthly bill, you pay when you go to use the clone -- "To activate this clone will cost you 10,000 ISK for the previous 3 days of storage" -- the actual value being (per month charge)/30*(num days since that clone last jumped out of).

Citadels could choose to set the % value lower, but their primary benefit would be multiple clones in one location and/or reduced cool-down times, etc.
Amarr Empire
#535 - 2016-03-09 17:23:35 UTC
Rob Kaichin wrote:
Obil Que wrote:


Asset recovery can be triggered by the user at any time



Seriously? What kind of sense does that even make? Where was this announced?



CCP need to clarify this mechanic.
Also need to know how it would affect "big" assets. i.e capitals/supercaps inside of XL Citadels
Reckoning Star Alliance
#536 - 2016-03-09 17:25:25 UTC
Rob Kaichin wrote:
Obil Que wrote:


Asset recovery can be triggered by the user at any time



Seriously? What kind of sense does that even make? Where was this announced?


I'm not sure if it has been mentioned in a forum comment or not but I confirmed it in the #structures channel on the Tweetfleet Slack with CCP Nullarbor before posting.
C C P Alliance
#537 - 2016-03-09 17:33:19 UTC
Update on the original thread:


  • Transaction fee: increased from 1.5% to 2.5% in all NPC stations and player structures.
  • Brokers' fee: increased to 5% in NPC stations.
  • Broker's fee formula with skills and standings: currently with max skills and NPC standings you can reduce the brokers' fee by 0.7-0.8%. We will modify skills and standings to decrease the tax by 1.5% and also change them from being percentage based to a flat reduction.

  • So brokers' fee formula becomes: 5% brokers fee - ([Broker Relation skill level]0.2 + [Faction Standing level]0.03 + [Corp Standing level]*0.02)

    Minimum brokers' fee in NPC stations becomes 3.5% with skill and standings maxed. Please note there is no NPC brokers' fee in Citadels structures, but you'll have to deal with what the owner charges you. Skill won't work for player-set brokers' fee either.

  • Cloning fee: decreased from 5m ISK to install or leave a clone behind to 900,000 ISK
  • Reprocessing: changed how reprocessing rigs work to mirror more closely other structure rigs. Other structure rigs give you the same bonuses no matter the structure size, but you gain move coverage as you move up.

  • So for example a Medium Citadel Missile Rig will only give you an application bonus to structure single target missiles, while a X-Large Citadel Rig will give you a missile application and projection bonus not only to single target missiles but to the guided bombs as well.

    With that in mind, base reprocessing yield of the reprocessing service: 50% (also includes compression free of charge)
    All of the rigs below give the same bonuses: Tech I rigs will give 52% if the structure is in high-sec, 55% otherwise. Tech II rigs below will give 55% if the structure is in high-sec, 60% otherwise.

    Medium rigs (only apply to Astrahus):
  • Tech I and II rigs that applies for high-sec ores: Veldspar, Scordite, Pyroxeres, Omber, Kernite and all variants.
  • Tech I and II rigs that applies for all other ores: Arkonor, Bistot, Crokite, Dark Ochre, Gneiss, Mercoxit, Spodumain, Hedbergite, Hemorphite, Jaspet and all variants.
  • Tech I and II rigs that applies for: Clear Icicle, Enriched Clear Icicle, White Glaze, Pristine White Glaze, Dark Glitter and Gelidus
  • Tech I and II rigs that applies for: Blue Ice, Thick Blue Ice, Glacial Mass, Smooth Glacial Mass, Glare Crust, Krystallos.

  • Large rigs (only apply to Fortizar):
  • Tech I and II rigs that applies for all ores.
  • Tech I and II rigs that applies for all ices.

  • X-Large rig (only applies for Keepstar):
  • Tech I and II rigs that applies for all ore and ices.

  • And that should cover everything. Please keep in mind this is still WIP and subject to change based on constructive feedback.
Goonswarm Federation
#538 - 2016-03-09 17:40:55 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Update on the original thread:


  • Transaction fee: increased from 1.5% to 2.5% in all NPC stations and player structures.
  • Brokers' fee: increased to 5% in NPC stations.
  • Broker's fee formula with skills and standings: currently with max skills and NPC standings you can reduce the brokers' fee by 0.7-0.8%. We will modify skills and standings to decrease the tax by 1.5% and also change them from being percentage based to a flat reduction.

  • So brokers' fee formula becomes: 5% brokers fee - ([Broker Relation skill level]0.2 + [Faction Standing level]0.03 + [Corp Standing level]*0.02)

    Minimum brokers' fee in NPC stations becomes 3.5% with skill and standings maxed. Please note there is no NPC brokers' fee in Citadels structures, but you'll have to deal with what the owner charges you. Skill won't work for player-set brokers' fee either.

  • Cloning fee: decreased from 5m ISK to install or leave a clone behind to 900,000 ISK
  • Reprocessing: changed how reprocessing rigs work to mirror more closely other structure rigs. Other structure rigs give you the same bonuses no matter the structure size, but you gain move coverage as you move up.

  • So for example a Medium Citadel Missile Rig will only give you an application bonus to structure single target missiles, while a X-Large Citadel Rig will give you a missile application and projection bonus not only to single target missiles but to the guided bombs as well.

    With that in mind, base reprocessing yield of the reprocessing service: 50% (also includes compression free of charge)
    All of the rigs below give the same bonuses: Tech I rigs will give 52% if the structure is in high-sec, 55% otherwise. Tech II rigs below will give 55% if the structure is in high-sec, 60% otherwise.

    Medium rigs (only apply to Astrahus):
  • Tech I and II rigs that applies for high-sec ores: Veldspar, Scordite, Pyroxeres, Omber, Kernite and all variants.
  • Tech I and II rigs that applies for all other ores: Arkonor, Bistot, Crokite, Dark Ochre, Gneiss, Mercoxit, Spodumain, Hedbergite, Hemorphite, Jaspet and all variants.
  • Tech I and II rigs that applies for: Clear Icicle, Enriched Clear Icicle, White Glaze, Pristine White Glaze, Dark Glitter and Gelidus
  • Tech I and II rigs that applies for: Blue Ice, Thick Blue Ice, Glacial Mass, Smooth Glacial Mass, Glare Crust, Krystallos.

  • Large rigs (only apply to Fortizar):
  • Tech I and II rigs that applies for all ores.
  • Tech I and II rigs that applies for all ices.

  • X-Large rig (only applies for Keepstar):
  • Tech I and II rigs that applies for all ore and ices.

  • And that should cover everything. Please keep in mind this is still WIP and subject to change based on constructive feedback.


(i posted this on reddit too, feel free to ignore if you saw it there before here)

One concern I have is that you're changing the rules for reprocessing such that lowsec can get 60% refines (up from 54% currently.) With this, a lowsec capital producer has a massive advantage, given that they can get first-class refines AND superior materials reduction from a Thukker Component Assembly Array. To me, this seems overpowered. Have you considered this, or considered allowing the Thukker array to be usable in nullsec?

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

C C P Alliance
#539 - 2016-03-09 17:52:01 UTC
Querns wrote:
Stuff


As mentioned there, we're open to 3 reprocessing bands.
Tactical Narcotics Team
#540 - 2016-03-09 17:52:35 UTC
Terraj Oknatis wrote:
I am now putting on my lobbyist hat. I would take CCP Ytterbium golfing except there are no good golfing resorts on Jita IV IV.

This abrupt 5% hit to station trading is far to harsh. It would be much better to make it a small increase, and creep it up as citadel use becomes more and more mainstream. The current course of action is going to **** off yet another section of the player base, that being the station traders who did nothing to deserve it....



CCP Ytterbium... Well I'm sorry we didn't get to go golfing but thanks for listening anyhow!
Forum Jump