These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123
 

Ascension features on Singularity

First post
Author
Elenahina
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#41 - 2016-11-03 17:43:37 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
I just noticed a gooey outflow of lights sloping downfrom the Gallente station undock in 6-C. I trust this is just a concept and won't end up on TQ because it looks abysmal and I can't see any point in ships flying down diagonally from the undock and return indefinitely.


It looks like they added the same sort of undocking paths they have on citadels and eng complexes. They also added the 0-radius docking ring so you know when you're in range to dock, at least on the stations I was looking at,.

Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno

coolruningc2016
rougde squarden moden miners
#42 - 2016-11-03 21:29:55 UTC  |  Edited by: coolruningc2016
hi ok so I have spotted something that is rely bugging me on sis Citadels and engineering complex's First of looks nice but I do not under stand why the basic complex one needs 9 hours ven time over citadel basic 3 hours? Both can do the same thing slimier size so why longer ven times. would be great if they wear on par to citadels or slight over so small 5 hours med 10 hours large 15h e.g.

Second this will tick a lot of corps and alliances off big style why is it each citadel or E complex to safe time is only allowed one of each module type in industry? So 1 lab 1 building array and so on when for example a large researching corps can have a large tower with about 5-6 labs why would you are asking players now in November to have a state of the art E complex or citadel x5

to do this will be less cost effective for small and larger corps as most corps alliances have 1-50 jobs running on a daily basis.

next could you guys on each industrial service module put a note for example this lab service module does 4 to 5 jobs per service module, and now we come to building freighters witch service module do I build them in. In high sec citadel it is not clear as no capital building in high sec so do we need a new class for them? and my tower say get a bonus to building for the module applied does the complex citadel on each tire get any base bonus? to labs to building or could the rigs not buff it up so t1 rig +5 to all lab slots per t1 rig t2 +slots to all innervation e.c.t?. I would be very great full if there is just a little more info added as stated why chose citadels or E complex to build in over towers witch is more cost effective right than the new citadels E complex's witch are not going to be cost effective to run.
Selak Zorander
Mord-Sith
#43 - 2016-11-07 16:38:29 UTC
coolruningc2016 wrote:
hi ok so I have spotted something that is rely bugging me on sis Citadels and engineering complex's First of looks nice but I do not under stand why the basic complex one needs 9 hours ven time over citadel basic 3 hours? Both can do the same thing slimier size so why longer ven times. would be great if they wear on par to citadels or slight over so small 5 hours med 10 hours large 15h e.g.

Second this will tick a lot of corps and alliances off big style why is it each citadel or E complex to safe time is only allowed one of each module type in industry? So 1 lab 1 building array and so on when for example a large researching corps can have a large tower with about 5-6 labs why would you are asking players now in November to have a state of the art E complex or citadel x5

to do this will be less cost effective for small and larger corps as most corps alliances have 1-50 jobs running on a daily basis.

next could you guys on each industrial service module put a note for example this lab service module does 4 to 5 jobs per service module, and now we come to building freighters witch service module do I build them in. In high sec citadel it is not clear as no capital building in high sec so do we need a new class for them? and my tower say get a bonus to building for the module applied does the complex citadel on each tire get any base bonus? to labs to building or could the rigs not buff it up so t1 rig +5 to all lab slots per t1 rig t2 +slots to all innervation e.c.t?. I would be very great full if there is just a little more info added as stated why chose citadels or E complex to build in over towers witch is more cost effective right than the new citadels E complex's witch are not going to be cost effective to run.


i agree that the vulnerability time is a bit long on the engineering complexes, i would be much happier if it was 6, 12, 24 respectively. I know they are cheaper and they are not centered around defense but i think cutting vulnerability back to being 2x as much as a citadel is much better than the current 3x.

as for the only fitting one lab module or one manufacturing module, its because the module itself enable you to do research or manufacturing. it does not give only a specific number of of lines. One module is all you will ever need by my understanding. it will handle as many jobs as you can start similar to the fact that stations (those in empire and i believe outposts but not 100% sure on the outposts) have no limit on the number of lines. if you can build or research and the station has manufacturing or research service available, then you can start a new job no matter how many jobs the engineering complex is already doing.
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#44 - 2016-11-09 21:03:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Altrue
Hi,

I have feedback about the Citadel Industry Facility Tax:

As it stands right now, the percentage you setup in your Structure Browser window, and that you will get for each job, is a percentage based off of the NPC tax applied to that job before the player tax, and that is then added to the final tax.

So, to take a concrete example:

  • I have an item worth 10 000 000 isk that I want to build. The System Cost Multiplier is at 1.00%.
  • That makes the base NPC tax at 100 000 isk.
  • The Citadel has a bonus of 5% to the tax rate so that's now 95 000 isk.
  • Now let's imagine that I have my industry fee tax setup at 25% in my citadel. That's an added 95 000isk x 0.25 = 23 750 isk tax.
  • So the final tax on the item will be 118 750 isk. 95k for the NPC and 23k for the corporation owning the Citadel.


Side-node: Please everyone take note that the maximum tax I could get in that situation, for my corp wallet, is 47500isk for a 10mil item. Again, that's the MAXIMUM in that situation. But let's come back to that later.

This is very weird. Your tax income is dependant of the System Cost multiplier of the system. Which means that as soon as it starts rising, the rise is even more important if you are in a citadel. Penalizing citadel producers more, and making quite the unstable revenue stream for the citadel owner.

Worse, to get a competitive tax rate while still making a profit, public industry citadel owners will have to calculate precisely the expected System Cost Multiplier, and micromanage it. Keep in mind that a low activity system at 0.1% System Cost Multiplier, can get taxed at 1400% by the citadel owner, and that's still only equal to a System Cost Multiplier of 1.5% for the producer.

BUT, should the System Cost Multiplier ever rise to a whooping, say, 0.4%, because the citadel is attracting some people, then suddenly your effective final Tax for the producer goes from 1.5% to 6%! For a 0.3% System Cost Multiplier. That's just insane! Imagine the required micromanagement.

Of course, all of that is only there for the purpose of demonstrating the holes in the current Citadel Owner Industry Tax calculation method, as said tax is anyway capped at 50%. Meaning that all hopes of profit for a public Industry Citadel owner in a low System Cost Multiplier system are lost anyway.

And even at that low 50% cap rate, if the System Cost Multiplier were to go from 3% to 5%, then your share relative to the total value of the item would go from 1.5% to 2.5%. So you'd need to manually adjust it down if you wanted to keep it flat and easy to understand for your customers. And forget about using same Structure Profile for citadels in different systems, at it may not be the same multiplier at all. (So the way it currently works on Sisi also defeats the point of Structure Profiles)
Again, that's bad day-to-day micromanaging on a per-structure basis.

What could be done instead:

  • The Citadel Tax Reduction should be a flat percentage reduction of the current System Cost Multiplier. Currently, going from -3% to -5% of tax reduction is COMPLETELY negligible as that's basically taxing the value of an item 0.1% less, in a 10% System Cost Multiplier system (which is almost as high as it gets and pretty rare). If, instead, it took the System Cost Multiplier percentage, and removed a flat percentage, then:
  • --- For a XL Engineering Complex, a 10% System Cost Multiplier would become a 5% System Cost Multiplier. (because minus 5%)
    --- For a Medium, a 7% System Cost Multiplier would become a 4% System Cost Multiplier (because -3%)
    --- For all Engineering Complexes, a 1% System Cost Multiplier would become a 0% System Cost Multiplier. Which makes more sense than taking a few isks off the top of the tax.

  • The Citadel Industry Facility Tax (aka the tax that goes to the player corporation) should be a flat value of the item. So, if I have a 1% tax, then it's like adding +1% to the System Cost Multiplier, after all Citadel Reductions have been applied of course (assuming the proposition above is applied too)
  • --- Example: Regardless of the System Cost Multiplier, if I have a 1% player tax, then I get 1% of the isk value of the item being produced. So if someone is producing a 10 000 000 isk Item in my citadel, I get 100 000 isk. PERIOD. No need to worry about wild changes in the System Cost Multiplier. EVER.


I believe this system would be more logical, easier to manage for everyone, would give more benefit to having a citadel in a low cost multiplier system, while providing tax incentives for everyone to use an engineering complex. Of course, if a flat percentage reduction of the System Cost Multiplier is too strong with -3/-4/-5, then maybe going to -1/-2/-3 could be an option.

Thanks for your attention.

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart

RainReaper
Bras-Tek Industries
Nefatari Union
#45 - 2016-11-09 21:25:50 UTC  |  Edited by: RainReaper
Altrue wrote:
Hi,

I have feedback about the Citadel Industry Facility Tax:

As it stands right now, the percentage you setup in your Structure Browser window, and that you will get for each job, is a percentage based off of the NPC tax applied to that job before the player tax, and that is then added to the final tax.

So, to take a concrete example:

  • I have an item worth 10 000 000 isk that I want to build. The System Cost Multiplier is at 1.00%.
  • That makes the base NPC tax at 100 000 isk.
  • The Citadel has a bonus of 5% to the tax rate so that's now 95 000 isk.
  • Now let's imagine that I have my industry fee tax setup at 25% in my citadel. That's an added 95 000isk x 0.25 = 23 750 isk tax.
  • So the final tax on the item will be 118 750 isk. 95k for the NPC and 23k for the corporation owning the Citadel.


Side-node: Please everyone take note that the maximum tax I could get in that situation, for my corp wallet, is 47500isk for a 10mil item. Again, that's the MAXIMUM in that situation. But let's come back to that later.

This is very weird. Your tax income is dependant of the System Cost multiplier of the system. Which means that as soon as it starts rising, the rise is even more important if you are in a citadel. Penalizing citadel producers more, and making quite the unstable revenue stream for the citadel owner.

Worse, to get a competitive tax rate while still making a profit, public industry citadel owners will have to calculate precisely the expected System Cost Multiplier, and micromanage it. Keep in mind that a low activity system at 0.1% System Cost Multiplier, can get taxed at 1400% by the citadel owner, and that's still only equal to a System Cost Multiplier of 1.5% for the producer.

BUT, should the System Cost Multiplier ever rise to a whooping, say, 0.4%, because the citadel is attracting some people, then suddenly your effective final Tax for the producer goes from 1.5% to 6%! For a 0.3% System Cost Multiplier. That's just insane! Imagine the required micromanagement.

Of course, all of that is only there for the purpose of demonstrating the holes in the current Citadel Owner Industry Tax calculation method, as said tax is anyway capped at 50%. Meaning that all hopes of profit for a public Industry Citadel owner in a low System Cost Multiplier system are lost anyway.

And even at that low 50% cap rate, if the System Cost Multiplier were to go from 3% to 5%, then your share relative to the total value of the item would go from 1.5% to 2.5%. So you'd need to manually adjust it down if you wanted to keep it flat and easy to understand for your customers. And forget about using same Structure Profile for citadels in different systems, at it may not be the same multiplier at all. (So the way it currently works on Sisi also defeats the point of Structure Profiles)
Again, that's bad day-to-day micromanaging on a per-structure basis.

What could be done instead:

  • The Citadel Tax Reduction should be a flat percentage reduction of the current System Cost Multiplier. Currently, going from -3% to -5% of tax reduction is COMPLETELY negligible as that's basically taxing the value of an item 0.1% less, in a 10% System Cost Multiplier system (which is almost as high as it gets and pretty rare). If, instead, it took the System Cost Multiplier percentage, and removed a flat percentage, then:
  • --- For a XL Engineering Complex, a 10% System Cost Multiplier would become a 5% System Cost Multiplier. (because minus 5%)
    --- For a Medium, a 7% System Cost Multiplier would become a 4% System Cost Multiplier (because -3%)
    --- For all Engineering Complexes, a 1% System Cost Multiplier would become a 0% System Cost Multiplier. Which makes more sense than taking a few isks off the top of the tax.

  • The Citadel Industry Facility Tax (aka the tax that goes to the player corporation) should be a flat value of the item. So, if I have a 1% tax, then it's like adding +1% to the System Cost Multiplier, after all Citadel Reductions have been applied of course (assuming the proposition above is applied too)
  • --- Example: Regardless of the System Cost Multiplier, if I have a 1% player tax, then I get 1% of the isk value of the item being produced. So if someone is producing a 10 000 000 isk Item in my citadel, I get 100 000 isk. PERIOD. No need to worry about wild changes in the System Cost Multiplier. EVER.


I believe this system would be more logical, easier to manage for everyone, would give more benefit to having a citadel in a low cost multiplier system, while providing tax incentives for everyone to use an engineering complex. Of course, if a flat percentage reduction of the System Cost Multiplier is too strong with -3/-4/-5, then maybe going to -1/-2/-3 could be an option.

Thanks for your attention.


you litteraly took the idea i had on SISI like 2 days ago. guess im not the only one who thought that was a good idea :p
Exept the part where the corporation set tax would be a set % of the items cost. i wonder how that would work. if it was the same in NPC stations then no one in a npc staion could ever make a proffit? or do you only want the tax to work like that in the player owned structures and not NPC stations?
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#46 - 2016-11-09 21:45:20 UTC
RainReaper wrote:

you litteraly took the idea i had on SISI like 2 days ago. guess im not the only one who thought that was a good idea :p
Exept the part where the corporation set tax would be a set % of the items cost. i wonder how that would work. if it was the same in NPC stations then no one in a npc staion could ever make a proffit? or do you only want the tax to work like that in the player owned structures and not NPC stations?


The corporation set tax is relative to the Structure Browser, which is a player only, Upwell Structures only thing. NPC stations wouldn't be included.

Of course, in a way, the System Cost Multiplier works exactly like the corporation set tax could work in Citadels: It's a flat % of the total value of the item. Right now, that's exactly what it is.

For that specific suggestion, I'm basically just asking that the corporation set tax work the same way.

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart

Messenger Of Truth
Butlerian Crusade
#47 - 2016-11-10 00:59:58 UTC
So let me get this straight Altrue: you're interested in manufacturing, but you dislike complexity and you hate fluctuating costs and profits? Shocked

Trade Hub Price Checker: stop.hammerti.me.uk/pricecheck

Visit "Haulers Channel" in game for all matters courier-related.

Structure name/system API: stop.hammerti.me.uk/api

Amarisen Gream
Pleasant Peninsula Productions
Digital Vendetta
#48 - 2016-11-10 01:05:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Amarisen Gream
My brain hurts.

"The Lord loosed upon them his fierce anger All of his fury and rage. He dispatched against them a band of Avenging Angels" - The Scriptures, Book II, Apocalypse 10:1

#NPCLivesMatter #Freetheboobs

probag Bear
Xiong Offices
#49 - 2016-11-10 04:27:53 UTC
Altrue wrote:


  • The Citadel Tax Reduction should be a flat percentage reduction of the current System Cost Multiplier. Currently, going from -3% to -5% of tax reduction is COMPLETELY negligible as that's basically taxing the value of an item 0.1% less, in a 10% System Cost Multiplier system (which is almost as high as it gets and pretty rare). If, instead, it took the System Cost Multiplier percentage, and removed a flat percentage, then:
  • --- For a XL Engineering Complex, a 10% System Cost Multiplier would become a 5% System Cost Multiplier. (because minus 5%)
    --- For a Medium, a 7% System Cost Multiplier would become a 4% System Cost Multiplier (because -3%)
    --- For all Engineering Complexes, a 1% System Cost Multiplier would become a 0% System Cost Multiplier. Which makes more sense than taking a few isks off the top of the tax.


I take it you weren't around for Industry Teams.

This suggestion is ******* insane and incredibly abusable and will result in people that know how to abuse it making dozens of billions a month from it. No personal offense meant to you.

First off, 4% is huge. As a mid-level industrial player, I cycle through about 80bil worth of manufacturing jobs per day. Once ECs are out, I am going to double that to 160bil. That's 6.4bil per day saved by just using an LEC. That's more than the actual expected profit I'd make from the manufacturing. And I'm not even a large-scale manufacturer. (hint: components greatly increase the amount of isk you cycle through; if you produce 10bil per day and have to make 1 stage of intermediary components, you're paying tax as if you were producing 20bil per day)

Second off, system cost index is a square root function of job activity. It takes 4 times as many jobs to drive the index from 3% to 6% as it does to drive the index from 0% to 3%. Let's say you have your large EC set up in a system:
- Without your suggestion, X job-hours would result in a system cost index of say 5%.
- With your suggestion, X job-hours would result in a system cost index of 1%, which is the same footprint as 1/25 * X unmodified job-hours. You'd literally be able to produce 25 times more and pay the same tax.

Look at the absurd example of a null-sec XL EC with your suggestion. You would be able to push through 1% of all manufacturing jobs in New Eden, and still come out with a 0% cost index. If you were to move all of Jita's jobs to a null-sec XL EC, the cost index would still be under 2%.
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#50 - 2016-11-10 06:18:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Altrue
Messenger Of Truth wrote:
So let me get this straight Altrue: you're interested in manufacturing, but you dislike complexity and you hate fluctuating costs and profits? Shocked


More accurately if you want to define my use case: I'm interested in manufacturing, and offer public manufacturing services, but I don't want to have to go in a high System Cost Multiplier system (which is nonsense, it would be going against the very logic behind the SCM) to be able to tax people high-enough that it is at least paying for the fuel.

Frankly, we don't need more citadels near Jita & co, it doesn't provide much services. The system should be balanced in such a way that the best profits are to be made in remote areas, just like the System Cost Multiplier was made to push people away from agglomerating too much.

I'm not against complexity (thankfully!) or fluctuating costs, and certainly not fluctuating profits (that'd be insane). But I think that it's really kinda dumb to have a player tax that is arbitrarily tied to the System Cost Multiplier.

In addition to all the reasons about micromanagement, lack of profit, unstability, etc... It's also very confusing. The UI basically says "Industry Tax - Public - 10%" and you end up getting like 0.05% of the item's value in tax... What? Shocked

But to be honest I didn't think about my use case when writing the initial post. I was gathering information in order to write my Engineering Complexes ultimate guide and thought: "Wait a minute, this is completely stupid" xD

I want Engineering Complexes, and Upwell structures in general to be useful, not niche.

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart

Mr Grape Drink
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#51 - 2016-11-10 15:13:38 UTC
probag Bear wrote:
Altrue wrote:


  • The Citadel Tax Reduction should be a flat percentage reduction of the current System Cost Multiplier. Currently, going from -3% to -5% of tax reduction is COMPLETELY negligible as that's basically taxing the value of an item 0.1% less, in a 10% System Cost Multiplier system (which is almost as high as it gets and pretty rare). If, instead, it took the System Cost Multiplier percentage, and removed a flat percentage, then:
  • --- For a XL Engineering Complex, a 10% System Cost Multiplier would become a 5% System Cost Multiplier. (because minus 5%)
    --- For a Medium, a 7% System Cost Multiplier would become a 4% System Cost Multiplier (because -3%)
    --- For all Engineering Complexes, a 1% System Cost Multiplier would become a 0% System Cost Multiplier. Which makes more sense than taking a few isks off the top of the tax.


I take it you weren't around for Industry Teams.

This suggestion is ******* insane and incredibly abusable and will result in people that know how to abuse it making dozens of billions a month from it. No personal offense meant to you.

First off, 4% is huge. As a mid-level industrial player, I cycle through about 80bil worth of manufacturing jobs per day. Once ECs are out, I am going to double that to 160bil. That's 6.4bil per day saved by just using an LEC. That's more than the actual expected profit I'd make from the manufacturing. And I'm not even a large-scale manufacturer. (hint: components greatly increase the amount of isk you cycle through; if you produce 10bil per day and have to make 1 stage of intermediary components, you're paying tax as if you were producing 20bil per day)

Second off, system cost index is a square root function of job activity. It takes 4 times as many jobs to drive the index from 3% to 6% as it does to drive the index from 0% to 3%. Let's say you have your large EC set up in a system:
- Without your suggestion, X job-hours would result in a system cost index of say 5%.
- With your suggestion, X job-hours would result in a system cost index of 1%, which is the same footprint as 1/25 * X unmodified job-hours. You'd literally be able to produce 25 times more and pay the same tax.

Look at the absurd example of a null-sec XL EC with your suggestion. You would be able to push through 1% of all manufacturing jobs in New Eden, and still come out with a 0% cost index. If you were to move all of Jita's jobs to a null-sec XL EC, the cost index would still be under 2%.


Yea, I dont think that part is a good idea, but I do agree on making the player tax a direct % of what is being built, not a percent of the index cost. 2% tax on a 1,000,000,000 ISK item with a system index of 2% would be 20,000,000 to the index and 20,000,000 to the player and 4% of the total item value. Not this silly 20,000,000 to the index and 400,000 to the player (.04%) for a total of 2.04% tax
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#52 - 2016-11-10 19:07:43 UTC
Didn't try yet on SiSi, but I not fully understand your claims. I'm familiar with industry in NPC stations and there it works like that. You pay a fee (not tax) for jobs which is the higher the more jobs of that type are active in the system, it's also tied to the base value of the item to manufacture, research etc. That's the production cost. On top of that comes a simple 10% NPC tax from the cost value. Usually the tax is a neglectable value, it's a tax factor on top of the production fee.

So here comes my knowledge gap, will the NPC tax factor in an EC be replaced by the owner's tax factor or will the owner's tax factor be additive to the 10% NPC tax factor similar to highsec POCOS?

Anyway it's a simple and straight forward system every industrialist understands. Of course in low index systems the cost and therefore the income from the tax factor will be small ... for a couple of days, before the index spikes because of the attractive location at first. The income is tied to the activity in your citadel, fair? Also because the index does not scale linear, there is a zone of cost stability for average systems.

But there remains a principle incompatibility of industry with cooperation. If you want to get a better deal, you must change the whole system how production works ...

I'm my own NPC alt.

Mr Grape Drink
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#53 - 2016-11-10 20:45:51 UTC
Tipa Riot wrote:
Didn't try yet on SiSi, but I not fully understand your claims. I'm familiar with industry in NPC stations and there it works like that. You pay a fee (not tax) for jobs which is the higher the more jobs of that type are active in the system, it's also tied to the base value of the item to manufacture, research etc. That's the production cost. On top of that comes a simple 10% NPC tax from the cost value. Usually the tax is a neglectable value, it's a tax factor on top of the production fee.

So here comes my knowledge gap, will the NPC tax factor in an EC be replaced by the owner's tax factor or will the owner's tax factor be additive to the 10% NPC tax factor similar to highsec POCOS?

Anyway it's a simple and straight forward system every industrialist understands. Of course in low index systems the cost and therefore the income from the tax factor will be small ... for a couple of days, before the index spikes because of the attractive location at first. The income is tied to the activity in your citadel, fair? Also because the index does not scale linear, there is a zone of cost stability for average systems.

But there remains a principle incompatibility of industry with cooperation. If you want to get a better deal, you must change the whole system how production works ...


There is no NPC tax in a player owned structure, only the production cost. The player tax replaces the NPC tax. But like you said, NPC tax is negligible. Which is a problem for the EC owner. Negligible tax doesn't cover all the fuel cost. He says Player tax should work the same as the production cost. 2% player tax should be 2% of the item cost, not 2% of the production cost.
Darkblad
#54 - 2016-11-11 09:34:55 UTC
Weapon Accuracy Score
turns (sorta back) into
Turret Tracking.

Value shown appears to remain that of WAS.
Salpun
Global Telstar Federation Offices
#55 - 2016-11-11 20:06:49 UTC
Looking over the info windows for the citadels and I realize all the deployment stats and location restrictions plus skill requirements to deploy, online and fit them are missing.

If i dont know something about EVE. I check https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/ISK_The_Guide

See you around the universe.

Careby
#56 - 2016-11-12 14:22:04 UTC
Altrue wrote:
...Your tax income is dependant of the System Cost multiplier of the system. Which means that as soon as it starts rising, the rise is even more important if you are in a citadel. Penalizing citadel producers more, and making quite the unstable revenue stream for the citadel owner.

Worse, to get a competitive tax rate while still making a profit, public industry citadel owners will have to calculate precisely the expected System Cost Multiplier, and micromanage it. Keep in mind that a low activity system at 0.1% System Cost Multiplier, can get taxed at 1400% by the citadel owner, and that's still only equal to a System Cost Multiplier of 1.5% for the producer....


At first glance it seems as though this will be self-regulating. As the system cost index rises, tax amounts increase. As taxes increase, less players choose to use the system. Less job hours in the system (eventually) result in a lower system cost index. So I figured an EC owner can set a tax rate and let market forces control structure use.

But with further thought, I realize it really is somewhat broken. While players can, without too much difficulty, see the structure industry tax rate, and the system cost index, there is not an easy way to see the overall effect of the two without actually getting to the point of installing a job. For instance, how many players comparing two systems, one with a system cost index of 2% and an EC with 5% industry tax rate, and the other with a system cost index of 3% and an EC with 1% industry tax rate, will conclude the job cost will be lower in the first system? And it isn't enough for one EC owner to micromanage the tax rate when competing with other structures that do not.

It will be interesting to see how many ECs pop up with 0% industry tax. There are valid reasons for offering 0% broker fees in a market citadel, but given the fact that the more an EC is used, the more it costs to use it, I can't see any benefit to reducing the tax rate.

ST8 ACTOR
Flintlock Asshatery
#57 - 2017-01-27 21:04:59 UTC
I think the point of player influence on costs being an after effect is to simply avoid situations where you could wind up owing money to player who runs jobs (because you can't program that there be no *negative cost).

What is truly idiotic though is that you have to have cost reducing factors on citadels as if simply making jobs faster isn't of any help with how system indexes work, or how they exhibit this taxes in job costs and then you don't know what to think about what they were derived from when it's in fact weird ass "how". In liu of simply removing cost reductions at loss of false novelty, you could instead adjust for this overall weirdness with the final matter of fact numbers for customers and a target margin for businesses.
Previous page123