These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Issues, Workarounds & Localization

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Please, fix industry tax in citadels

First post First post
Author
Andrew Xadi
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1 - 2017-02-08 14:28:15 UTC
So, atm you can set industry tax max to 50%, same with market and with reprocessing tax. formula for reprocessig looks like (more or less):

< materials value > * < tax set by player > /100


market tax:

< item value > * < tax set by player > /100


for industry tho it looks like:

< item value > * < system cost index > * (1 + < tax set by player >)


so market and reprocessing tax can be set for 50% of item value, while industry tax depends on system cost index, what does it mean?


  • * 11,26% is the current jita system cost index, let's say that you can get that kind of index in where your citadel is. Then you can tax entire 5,63% of the item value.

  • * structure browser shows tax set by players, so if you set 4% in system with index at 3%, it's 3,12% tax, while if you set 20% in system with index at 2%, it's 2,4% tax. It still imply that you will pay more in system with 2% index

  • * there is almost no way to make the tax pay for fuel cost


how to fix it?
use that formula:

< item value > * (< system cost index > + < tax set by player >)
Sullen Decimus
Polaris Rising
The Bastion
#2 - 2017-02-12 07:35:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Sullen Decimus
Yay someone finally figured out what I've been saying... I've been trying to recommend to CCP some fixes for this. First step though was getting the equation all layed out so that everyone can see. Now that you can others now can see how little tax actually is made.

But yeah in the current form industrial tax is worthless.

CSM XI Member

Twitter: Sullen_Decimus

Tweetfleet: @sullen_decimus

Andrew Xadi
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#3 - 2017-02-12 13:23:31 UTC
Sullen Decimus wrote:
Yay someone finally figured out what I've been saying... I've been trying to recommend to CCP some fixes for this. First step though was getting the equation all layed out so that everyone can see. Now that you can others now can see how little tax actually is made.

But yeah in the current form industrial tax is worthless.



How much you can make from it is 1 thing, i'm making enough to cover fuel (41 units/hour) from reprocessing (5 out of 41 units/hour) which is stupid but it works, having to explain that in system next door with 4% tax and 3% index people will pay more than in my citadels with 20% tax and 2% index is what's the pain for me. I'd love to get more money out of it, but showing actual tax in structure browser would be awesome for me
Sullen Decimus
Polaris Rising
The Bastion
#4 - 2017-02-13 18:41:41 UTC
Andrew Xadi wrote:
Sullen Decimus wrote:
Yay someone finally figured out what I've been saying... I've been trying to recommend to CCP some fixes for this. First step though was getting the equation all layed out so that everyone can see. Now that you can others now can see how little tax actually is made.

But yeah in the current form industrial tax is worthless.



How much you can make from it is 1 thing, i'm making enough to cover fuel (41 units/hour) from reprocessing (5 out of 41 units/hour) which is stupid but it works, having to explain that in system next door with 4% tax and 3% index people will pay more than in my citadels with 20% tax and 2% index is what's the pain for me. I'd love to get more money out of it, but showing actual tax in structure browser would be awesome for me


It's even worse trying to explain to people how irrelevant structure tax is compared to a systems SCI. A structure owner charging only 4% tax in a system with a SCI of 5 will be making over twice the amount of taxes for each job of manufacturing than someone charging over 10% tax in a system with an SCI of 2. The industry UI doesn't help this because the SCI is hidden for systems unless you hover over them while the structure tax is shown in it's own column. This only leads people to come to the wrong assumptions as to what REALLY matters when they're building things.

CSM XI Member

Twitter: Sullen_Decimus

Tweetfleet: @sullen_decimus

Andrew Xadi
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#5 - 2017-02-14 01:16:26 UTC
Sullen Decimus wrote:
Andrew Xadi wrote:
Sullen Decimus wrote:
Yay someone finally figured out what I've been saying... I've been trying to recommend to CCP some fixes for this. First step though was getting the equation all layed out so that everyone can see. Now that you can others now can see how little tax actually is made.

But yeah in the current form industrial tax is worthless.



How much you can make from it is 1 thing, i'm making enough to cover fuel (41 units/hour) from reprocessing (5 out of 41 units/hour) which is stupid but it works, having to explain that in system next door with 4% tax and 3% index people will pay more than in my citadels with 20% tax and 2% index is what's the pain for me. I'd love to get more money out of it, but showing actual tax in structure browser would be awesome for me


It's even worse trying to explain to people how irrelevant structure tax is compared to a systems SCI. A structure owner charging only 4% tax in a system with a SCI of 5 will be making over twice the amount of taxes for each job of manufacturing than someone charging over 10% tax in a system with an SCI of 2. The industry UI doesn't help this because the SCI is hidden for systems unless you hover over them while the structure tax is shown in it's own column. This only leads people to come to the wrong assumptions as to what REALLY matters when they're building things.



yup, and that's why player tax should be applied to item value, not system cost index, or system cost index should not be applied to player owned structures. Removing npc tax from citadels would remove a huge isk sink so that's probably not going to happen, but i don't see any reason not to apply player tax to item base value together with npc tax
Sullen Decimus
Polaris Rising
The Bastion
#6 - 2017-02-14 15:46:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Sullen Decimus
Andrew Xadi wrote:


yup, and that's why player tax should be applied to item value, not system cost index, or system cost index should not be applied to player owned structures. Removing npc tax from citadels would remove a huge isk sink so that's probably not going to happen, but i don't see any reason not to apply player tax to item base value together with npc tax


I don't have a problem having the NPC tax as you stated is a major isk sink which the game right now can't afford to remove considering we have been at a massive faucet imbalance for so long. That being said I agreed with what you were saying on the taxes being applied to the items base value and not the SCI. The current system basically makes structure owners WANT to screw their users as much as possible by driving SCI up in the systems where their structures are.

I have been pushing that this is an issue but we need to see more people like you stating this is an issue so I can point to you when i say "people know about this" Big smile

CSM XI Member

Twitter: Sullen_Decimus

Tweetfleet: @sullen_decimus

Andrew Xadi
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#7 - 2017-02-14 22:00:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Andrew Xadi
Sullen Decimus wrote:

I don't have a problem having the NPC tax as you stated is a major isk sink which the game right now can't afford to remove considering we have been at a massive faucet imbalance for so long. That being said I agreed with what you were saying on the taxes being applied to the items base value and not the SCI. The current system basically makes structure owners WANT to screw their users as much as possible by driving SCI up in the systems where their structures are.

I have been pushing that this is an issue but we need to see more people like you stating this is an issue so I can point to you when i say "people know about this" Big smile


ok, i take that back, they did removed the SCI http://imgur.com/a/KcdzX

edit: they actually ****** up the math and it's reduced, since player tax comes from it, my income is also reduced \o/
CCP Nagual
C C P
C C P Alliance
#8 - 2017-02-15 14:38:50 UTC
That screenshot was taken on Feb 14? That should be a bug that was fixed today (it lasted 24 hours apparently).

So, please ignore that ; )

What about other activities on the ECs? Invention, MR, TR, etc...? Are there perceived issues on those too?



Andrew Xadi
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#9 - 2017-02-15 14:54:56 UTC
CCP Nagual wrote:
That screenshot was taken on Feb 14? That should be a bug that was fixed today (it lasted 24 hours apparently).

So, please ignore that ; )

What about other activities on the ECs? Invention, MR, TR, etc...? Are there perceived issues on those too?





yes, it was taken on Feb 14 and it's fixed now, i'm not sure about other activities, but i didn't notice anything. What about that formula change tho since i got dev to answer :P (or at least showing real tax in structure browser)
Freelancer117
So you want to be a Hero
#10 - 2017-02-15 19:27:19 UTC
Andrew Xadi wrote:

yes, it was taken on Feb 14 and it's fixed now, i'm not sure about other activities, but i didn't notice anything. What about that formula change tho since i got dev to answer :P (or at least showing real tax in structure browser)


Great question, looking forward to the reply to Cool

Eve online is :

A) mining simulator B) glorified chatroom C) spreadsheets online

D) CCP Games Pay to Win at skill leveling, with instant gratification

http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg

http://bit.ly/1egr4mF

Sullen Decimus
Polaris Rising
The Bastion
#11 - 2017-02-16 16:31:16 UTC
CCP Nagual wrote:
That screenshot was taken on Feb 14? That should be a bug that was fixed today (it lasted 24 hours apparently).

So, please ignore that ; )

What about other activities on the ECs? Invention, MR, TR, etc...? Are there perceived issues on those too?





As i've stated on other chat...Big smile... invention/ME/TE research is currently terrible because the "cost reduction" rigs actually kill the income for the structure owner. This is also multiplied by the inherent cost reduction in EC's as all these reductions occur before the owner tax is actually pulled. As a result the owner is essentially screwing them self by offering better services.

CSM XI Member

Twitter: Sullen_Decimus

Tweetfleet: @sullen_decimus

CCP Nagual
C C P
C C P Alliance
#12 - 2017-02-16 17:06:11 UTC
As mentioned before, the tooltip should show clearly how costs are calculated. Many people did not know that.

Formula change: we are talking about this. This thread here and the one on reddit are being looked at. The discussion right now is about looking deeper into the issues and the questions that arise from the entirety of the system, where SCI plays such a huge role and is, from all in game UI, not feedbacked enough.

On our side our objectives are to allow players to make an informed decision about where to run jobs (no matter which kind). This means being able to compare costs easily between different structures offering services and picking the one that suits them most (in a balance of cost and time and distance). Players who own the structures should be free to compete for those clients with the options they have in hand (tax and investment). We cannot and will not guarantee "profit from taxes" to anyone who builds a structure as we cannot (and should not) predict behaviour from competitors offering similar services who are willing to run at a loss.

In order to achieve these (and please let me know if those sound crazy) there are changes in the UI that must be taken into account and will play a big role, alongside any change to the equation. And all those are together, trying to make the competition and the choices readable and understandable.

Unfortunatelly there is no ETA on this right now but we are working on it.
Andrew Xadi
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#13 - 2017-02-16 17:23:28 UTC
CCP Nagual wrote:
As mentioned before, the tooltip should show clearly how costs are calculated. Many people did not know that.

Formula change: we are talking about this. This thread here and the one on reddit are being looked at. The discussion right now is about looking deeper into the issues and the questions that arise from the entirety of the system, where SCI plays such a huge role and is, from all in game UI, not feedbacked enough.

On our side our objectives are to allow players to make an informed decision about where to run jobs (no matter which kind). This means being able to compare costs easily between different structures offering services and picking the one that suits them most (in a balance of cost and time and distance). Players who own the structures should be free to compete for those clients with the options they have in hand (tax and investment). We cannot and will not guarantee "profit from taxes" to anyone who builds a structure as we cannot (and should not) predict behaviour from competitors offering similar services who are willing to run at a loss.

In order to achieve these (and please let me know if those sound crazy) there are changes in the UI that must be taken into account and will play a big role, alongside any change to the equation. And all those are together, trying to make the competition and the choices readable and understandable.

Unfortunatelly there is no ETA on this right now but we are working on it.


SCI is fine, it's the owner tax being applied to SCI and not to base item value that's the problem.

as of UI, when you go to structure browser and hover over the industry service of a citadel, it should show up whole tax, not just the player tax

I'm not saying that structure have to provide income, but at the moment reprocessing thingy which require 5 units of fuel per hour pays for all the fuel which is 41 units per hour, while industry tax pays maybe for those 5 units of fuel, or less. All/most of the ore that is reprocessed is used to build capital parts and then capitals in those structures. reprocessing tax is at 2,5% and industry tax is 20%, in my case it pays for it's self already, but the way it do is broken imo
Freelancer117
So you want to be a Hero
#14 - 2017-02-16 20:37:26 UTC
CCP Nagual wrote:

Unfortunatelly there is no ETA on this right now but we are working on it.


Awesome, can you please link the reddit post about this topic.

Eve online is :

A) mining simulator B) glorified chatroom C) spreadsheets online

D) CCP Games Pay to Win at skill leveling, with instant gratification

http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg

http://bit.ly/1egr4mF

Soleil Fournier
Destructive Influence
Northern Coalition.
#15 - 2017-02-17 15:05:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Soleil Fournier
Perhaps something to consider is allowing structure owners to set a "per-job fee" or something similar, so income is not necessarily tied to the value of the jobs being installed.

Adding a fee per job-hour that structure owners can set would be another option.
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#16 - 2017-02-17 16:10:47 UTC
Fully agree to that points, the player tax should be independent of the SCI NPC tax. The current system encourages people to setup complexes in high index systems to farm newbies, instead of providing the service in more valuable locations and get a fair fee. Also the cost reduction rigs applied before tax calculation is ridiculous.

I'm my own NPC alt.

Sullen Decimus
Polaris Rising
The Bastion
#17 - 2017-02-21 19:02:30 UTC
Tipa Riot wrote:
Fully agree to that points, the player tax should be independent of the SCI NPC tax. The current system encourages people to setup complexes in high index systems to farm newbies, instead of providing the service in more valuable locations and get a fair fee. Also the cost reduction rigs applied before tax calculation is ridiculous.


Get out of my head..... i don't like it when people beat me to posting what i've been shouting internally for months :)

CSM XI Member

Twitter: Sullen_Decimus

Tweetfleet: @sullen_decimus

Andrew Xadi
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#18 - 2017-02-26 22:48:47 UTC
bump? i guess
Andrew Xadi
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#19 - 2017-03-03 18:33:56 UTC
Andrew Xadi wrote:
bump? i guess


another one