Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

I've been making some posts on this thread. And it's sufficed to say my concerns about this are/were 3 fold:

First was do with the issue of being locked out of citadels where you had assets. Now I don't trawl through Reddit, so I didn't know CCP had commented on this and since free asset recovery for this has been commented on by CCP, I'm sure even though it hasn't been officially sanctified, I'm sure that it will happen, because CCP are very customer focused and have our interests at heart.

Secondly is the shear level of taxation and broker's fees at NPC stations. Some people, who I refer to as morons for the sake of finding an apt descriptive term, have commented that 7.5% isn't that much.

Most people starting out as traders at entry level (day 1), mostly trade in cheap stuff where they buy things at 95% of the market value via buy order and sell them for 100%. Doesn't take a genius to figure out that 7.5% is more than 5%. They will make a loss doing this in an NPC station post Citadel expansion. At the moment the broker's fee + tax is 3.5%, so trading is profitable without skills at NPC stations for now.

Now the morons, have commented that traders can somehow miraculously increase the sell price of any item without an issue.

The most common thing new traders trade in is Veldspar. Now if the sell value of Veldspar goes up, so will Tritanium, which is kind of in everything in EVE. Therefor the price of everything will increase... which is kind of unlikely. Alternatively the traders can buy Veldspar cheaper, meaning less ISK for the miners... also very unlikely.

More likely is that the middle man will be squeezed out making entry level trading unviable in NPC stations.
The solution to this is to farm standings with both the faction and corporation that own the NPC station to an modified standing of 10. Aswell as leveling both Accounting and Broker Relations to V.
This will reduce that figure from 7.5% to 4%.

However you can set the broker's fee in a citadel to 3%, same as the minimum you can get with Broker Relations V and standings of 10. Therefor the only skill you'd need is Accounting V. Not Broker Relations, Social or Connections Skills.
That's a nice 2 months of skill training you don't need to bother with and not to mention not having to farm standings. Seriously no one will do this if they don't have to! So, every new trader will go to a citadel, and once they start making ISK, they aren't going to stop, are they?

Thirdly; due to the above most new traders will start out in citadels, because it's easier. They can buy in Jita 4-4, haul and sell in a citadel for 1% tax + 3% brokers fee and make profit. There is, last I heard no restrictions where you can and can't anchor a citadel, you can't anchor a POS in Jita, but you could put a large citadel 11,000km from Jita 4-4, for warping convenience.

Let's say you do this, new traders start moving stuff from Jita 4-4 to this new large citadel, owned of-course by a null-sec alliance cause no-one else has the trillions of ISK it takes to build a large citadel.

Then comes the monopoly, let's say it's EVE's perennial bad-boys, Goonswarm Federation build this citadel.
Then they decide to destroy any other citadel's anchored in Jita (they have the manpower to do it).
Imagine if they had the only citadel in Jita, and due to my earlier reasoning, all trade in Jita (currently 70% of all trade in New-Eden) suddenly start going through a Goonswarm Federation citadel, who in turn, get a shiny 3% share of all the profits through Broker's Fees.

That is 2.1% of all ISK in EVE online, which I imagine is a very big number.

So Goonswarm Federation are making lots of ISK, because of this monopoly. The only thing they'd need to do to maintain it is War-Declare the other Null-Sec alliances constantly. Since Null-Sec alliances are the only ones that could afford a citadel, allowing them to attack citadels without Concord intervention (citadels have very long on-lining time, during which they have no shields or armor and are very easy to kill).

Plus the "effort" plus defending their own (large citadels have access to the AoE ECM's and AoE Neuts which are being developed for Super-Carriers in Citadel. With a fleet of 50 defending ships in-front of that citadel, it would be impossible to destroy with Sub-Capital vessels.

Net result:
Trade monopoly. This unlimited flow of ISK would allow whoever gains control to build an empire in Null-Sec that no-one will be able to topple. Capitals will be broken with Citadel's release, with unlimited funds they can give them away to their members, giving them the largest capital fleet and unassailable power.

As of November 2015? all C5 + C6 wormholes in EVE, the most lucrative space in EVE that isn't Sovereignty Null-Sec are controlled by renters. Look at who's renting, Null-Sec alliances using there massive capital fleets to evict anyone that doesn't pay the rent.

Low-Sec will be dominated by capitals post Citadel, that much is obvious to anyone, OP is OP.

And of-course don't forget the trade monopoly in High-Sec to fund it all.

This will affect everyone, from Null-Sec veterans to High-Sec care-bears.

At the risk of engaging into a chicken and egg situation, if there's an incentive for 'louts' to move (which there is: clones, geography, cheaper taxes) then the traders should follow, no?

It's one of the most immediately obvious things about PVP alliance deployments in FW space. An analysis of systems shows where people are staging due to increased market value: when Nulli moved to Uemon, the market there went into overdrive for a while.

It's like LS ore sell orders: people do pick them up and move them to where they can make a profit/ships. See Kirith's (I think?) blog post about buy orders. Kaeda may have posted it too.

@Khan.

The limiting system for Citadels is pretty simple: no Jita (possibly no Amarr), no Thera.

After that, it's a free for all.

Fitting limitation is what's the big delineator for Citadels: Citadels in HS can't use modules which LS and NS Citadels can. So they'll be less capable.

Those 30T won't realize because the trade volume and the whole market of New Eden will shrink in proportion to the increased fees, something factor 5, hence the Citadel holder will make about 6T.

Thanks, indeed I did not find all chatter from devs about that ... but it does not matter as long as there is no dev blog officially making this statements, it's just chatter.

BTW, does anybody know numbers what an L or XL citadel with cloning and market costs in fuel every months? Then we can reasoning what a suitable revenue shall be ...

Going to start in established territory, and get a little bit further out the cause and effect here.

A: CCP still wants to encourage people to move to Citadels instead of NPC stations.

B: Since transaction tax will be the same at both Citadels and NPC stations, the only difference is the Broker Fee, which is currently between .3% and .2% for any trader willing to spend an afternoon grinding up standings. A grand total of .5%ish cost between listing buy orders, then relisting the bought items as sell orders is a very tiny carrot to move away from the current supreme trade hub of Jita 4-4. Practically nonexistant. For a 5% margin item that's only 10% of your raw margin, and it gets less with higher margin items. No reason to move there.

This also means that a station owner with a broker fee of over .2% will attract no traders outside of their own alliance members (and not even most of those) because it will be cheaper to trade in NPC stations.

If a Citadel has a 0.1% broker fee that's only a .0875%-.02% difference in broker fee's for any halfway competent trader. Absolutely useless for inspiring people to move to a Citadel to trade.

C: Broker fee's and transaction tax's during the month of February provided an ISK sink of roughly 15.5 Trillion isk, per http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/70094/1/10_-_hO35OM1.png

Let's imagine for a second that we kept the current tax rate, but that everyone switched over to Citadels anyway because god knows why. Suddenly there's 5.8 Trillion a month that instead of going into an ISK sink, goes into another players pockets, removing it as a sink. Not good.

In a completely not coincidental fashion, The new Transaction Tax of 2.5% can be reduced to 1% through skills, which assuming a 0% broker fee is almost the exact same amount of an isk sink in a player Citadel as current NPC Transaction Tax + Broker Fee in an NPC station, assuming 6/6 empire/corp standings.

So all at the same time, CCP encourages people to move to Citadels to trade, provides a carrot for people to build citadels to take advantage of trade, preserves and even increases an isk sink in an economy still with too many faucets,, and promotes the use of service modules as replacement fuel block consumers which in turn drives the massive ice and PI market.

That last bit is kind of important too. Fuel blocks and PI have massive trade volume and demand, which drives tons of in game activities. With POS's being phased out and the Citadel itself not requiring fuel, the Citadel Service Modules which do need to be in high enough demand to continue driving large scale ice and PI production.

It's not like they are just throwing ideas at the wall to see what sticks, there's ton of reasoning they don't explain outright in case they decide to change things up later and have to explain why they are backtracking on what people saw as changes with reasonable reasons.

Okay, let's look at these....

Option A:

--Waht you will need to do:

1. Plop down a citadel.
2. Destroy any other citadels.
3. Destroy any new citadels that are plopped down.
4. Maybe even destroy citadels in neighboring systems.
5. Defend your citadel on occasion.

Number 1 is going to entail a substantial investment, despite your claims on your blog. To run the modules you will need fuel blocks. Lots of them too, and if you are going to do this go big or go home, so XL citadel. I've already shown that if you are going to run a citadel indefinitely you are committing to essentially 3.4 trillion ISK. Then you'll have to have people doing things like fueling...and chances are that isn't going to come free either. Then you'll have to try and convince people to come and use your XL trade hub. That too will entail effort and you may even have to set up some sort of method to reimburse people, kind of like how banks have capital requirements. So you'll quite possible have ISK sitting idle (as such a better option would be high value illiquid game items or something that can appreciate over time).

Even doing all of this...there is nothing to ensure you'll have dominance. You keep invoking names like Goons and PL as if everyone will go, "Welp, that's that....Goons got it." You are making a huge assumption, an idiotic assumption. Keep in mind that to destroy an XL armed and fully operation citadel will likely take ALOT of sub-capital ships. PL cannot field ALOT because there is not ALOT of them. And being PL does not make their guns to more damage simply by reputation alone.

So, is it possible? Yeah, I suppose it just looks damn unlikely.

And your numbers are off and your assumption about the process are also off. Not all trade is done in Jita. Acting like it will all be done in Perimeter (you finally learned that there no citadels allowed in Jita, bravo on that...took you long enough). Second, if somebody is starting to accumulate all the ISK, then people will be buying less, and less. You can't just take a number in this situation and project it out N months and go there, that is the number. If Bob the Trade Lord has 50% of the ISK in the game, that means 50% is now being spent on stuff. So by definition Bob's income has to go down too.

You really should stick to your nonsensical time series analysis. I particularly like how you think time series statistical models are behavioral models.

Option B:

--Waht you will need to do:

1. Plop down a citadel.
2. Defend your citadel on occasion.

Number 1 is going to entail a substantial investment, despite your claims on your blog. To run the modules you will need fuel blocks. Lots of them too, and if you are going to do this go big or go home, so XL citadel. I've already shown that if you are going to run a citadel indefinitely you are committing to essentially 3.4 trillion ISK. Then you'll have to have people doing things like fueling...and chances are that isn't going to come free either. Then you'll have to try and convince people to come and use your XL trade hub. That too will entail effort and you may even have to set up some sort of method to reimburse people, kind of like how banks have capital requirements. So you'll quite possible have ISK sitting idle (as such a better option would be high value illiquid game items or something that can appreciate over time).

So option B will entail substantially less effort and even less risk (going out to destroy a competing Citadel and welping the fleet is not good, not destroying it is not good either).

So I see option B as the far more likely. And as for option A, you think CCP is just going to stand idly by if it does happen?

Does nobody read? At all, I mean damn son, look up two posts.

http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/i-feel-safe-in-citadel-city/
http://puu.sh/nF4g2/736d601926.png

"Please note asset recovery can be done remotely. There is no need to be in the same solar system, or even docking access to initiate the process to recover your assets. In the same vein, the station owner(s) will never be able to tweak or remove items from other character personal hangars. They will only be able to tamper with corporation hangars and their own character hangars. This works the same way for jobs, or even market orders that are started by an individual. This rule exists to prevent asset appropriation in structures that will be open for public use."

It was in the dev blog from the very start, the one you didn't read before complaining.

As for fuel costs, It's 40 fuel block an hour for the Market Module with an initial onlining cost of 2880 blocks. 10 blocks an hour for Clone services with 720 initial, 5 blocks an hour with 360 initial for each compression and reprocessing. You can fuel these with any of the current racial fuel blocks.

Alll 4 service modules on a large citadel would cost 60 blocks an hour, with an initial onlining amount of 4320 blocks to get them all started.

At 20k a fuel block, that's 1.2 million an hour, 28.8 mil a day, 864 mil per 30 day month, with an initial onlining cost of 86.4 million.

A citadel with a .2% broker fee to match current broker fee's would thus need to launder over 428 Billion isk a month through a trade citadel to recoup just their fuel costs. To pay for fuel and recoup construction costs at that broker fee level would require roughly 1.2 Trillion a month trade movement for an entire year to pay for a minimally fit Fortizar Citadel.

I tire of you.

Here, suitably emphasised to suit your failing eyesight.

Here is another thing.

Suppose you start a Trade alliance. You get some people and pool your ISK and set up an XL citadel for trading purposes. You arm it, and let's say, for the sake of argument it works. Now you get war decced. Oh noes, right? Not so fast. Unlike with Jita 4-4 they cannot camp your undock. Well they can, but you can sit there in your citadel and shoot them....unlike with Jita 4-4. With Jita 4-4 you had to have neutral alts in noob corps to avoid these guys and they still sat outside the station like a canker.

As for the risk/reward and broker's fees, CCP is making the change to induce players to move and to induce players to set up citadels in HS.

Can you stop your completely and totally intellectually bankrupt attempt to try and justify NOT having citadels in HS? Your ability to turn on a dime and go 180 is indeed impressive, but it also underscores you dishonesty.