These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New Dev Blog: Player-owned Customs Office

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Max Devious
X-M.MagnetS
#1441 - 2011-10-25 18:02:18 UTC
admiral root wrote:
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Because, qutie simply enough, deliberately opening holes into empire is nothing more an open invitation to having your hole invaded. Granted, it's probably possible someone actually does that... we tend to consider them future targets however and not someone we'd consider smart enough to occupy wormholes for any significant period of time.


So you're making a smart choice (IMO) regarding peasants who dare to intrude in your system and as a consequence the new customs offices aren't giving you a benefit. Working as intended?


If their intention is to give us a huge pain in the behind with absolutely no benefit and possibly driving some of us out of Wspace temporarily then it is working perfectly.

Max.
Creat Posudol
German Oldies
#1442 - 2011-10-25 18:06:43 UTC
Meldan Anstian wrote:
(quoting response 1390 by Creat)

I don't disagree at all that it is a valid tactic.
[...]
Kill off defending players 1 by 1? You're kidding right? If the defender is so stupid to warp to 0 to see if someone is attacking a PCO, they deserve to lose it. Have a tactical 150+ km away from the POCO and you can see if a attack is occurring in your battleship and warp off before you can be tackled.

Why would you send ships out worth more than the PCO to begin with? The only thing you are defending is the income, and the value (80 mil ISK) of the PCO. You don't lose SOV, you don't loose assets held within the PCO, you don't get anchored structures around the PCO. Yeah, I would go for a fight for fights sake, but you don't need a PCO to get into a fleet fight.


You misunderstood me completely there. I was saying that if the ATTACKERS (!!!) split up to attack multiple POCOs, putting one attacker at each non-primary target just for the mail(s) to cover the primary attack (as you suggested), then those lone attackers could be easily picked off one by one if the defenders do manage to get even a small defense fleet together. Nobody is gonna defend anything unless it is upon reinforcement exit, there are no defenders in your case!

Also throughout your replies you constantly seem to think that the increased interaction is supposed to occur at this point in the first place. It isn't - as I've already stated as well. That is what reinforcement is for, to have a time and a place to meet and have "interaction" Lol

If someone decides to shoot some POCOs just to generate some mails, let him. Who cares? Unless the POCO is reinforced nobody is gonna move. You can try to drop by if you happen to be in the vicinity, but just wait for him to reinforce it, and either fight him upon reinforcement exit, or rep up the shields enough so that reinforcement resets. Who cares about a couple of (or couple of dozen) mails?

Scrapyard Bob wrote:
As for the economics of destructible POCOs - it wouldn't be as big of an issue if there were multiple sizes to choose from.

Then you could have:

10M - POCO w/ half the PG/CPU of a small POS tower, 1000 m3, 100k ISK of fuel per day
20M - small tower sized POCO, 2000 m3, 400k ISK of fuel per day
40M - medium tower sized POCO, 3000 m3 packaged, 1M ISK of fuel/day
80M - large tower sized POCO, 4000 m3 packaged, 2M ISK of fuel/day

With the multiple sizes, you would then have the choice of "what do I want to risk" and "how much POS defense do I want to anchor". The current "single size" POCO proposal won't work - it will be too expensive for some situations, too easy to kill for others.

Give them small shield bubbles and make them so that if you have standings to use the POCO, you can enter the shields. Just like regular POS bubbles, you wouldn't be able to target anything inside the bubble. Those who use the POCO (such as haulers) would love the safety. Make it so that any standings change doesn't take place until downtime, to avoid someone ejecting people from the POCO bubble.

The base P1 and P2 tariffs would have to be increased about 5x to pay for a POCO erected at a P1 harvest planet. And P4 tariff is currently about 2x too high.


Have you not been reading anything in this thread? A POCO may be - under the best of circumstances - creating about 4-5 mil of revenue a week (with current numbers). It's one of the big problems that the return of investment is taking 6 months at least. At least with these number you could never make back your investment even with heavy PI on the planet, you'll actually lose money doing it!

Also it couldn't have a normal POS-Shield, which has also been discussed here, since you could either fly inside and just shoot the thing directly, or people don't have access so they can't do PI and the thing will lose even more money!
If they act like POS otherwise (safety for hauler and stuff) that goes directly against having more interaction and the fact that CCP decided to display them on the overview (yes, this is supposed to stay this way, one of the few confirmed things so far).

Jowen Datloran wrote:
Creat Posudol wrote:
With destructible POCOs the incentive for large entities to attack drops significantly. Yes, they can grieve people, but it's tedious and provides NO payout WHATSOEVER. They don't drop anything upon destruction. It would be solely to grieve, and there is no reason anyone would do that on a large scale except to influence the market and control prices. Providing a payout to grieving these structures is a very VERY bad thing in my opinion!

I am amazed that somebody can write things like this such a short time after Goons have been causing havoc on high sec ice fields.

They have a very specific reason to do so, even though they may love the tears that creates too: They get ransoms from people to not do it again, and they want to control the market for ice products. If you have a look at the latest dev-blog this has clearly worked (at least to some degree): http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=2972


In general, there is currently an imbalance, or rather a dilemma: You can't make them much cheaper, or they have no value and nobody ever defends them, failing to incite the wanted interaction. Currently they are too expensive to ever make a reasonable return on the investment. You also can't raise taxes too much since that would cause POS prices to increase even further than they supposedly already will. So what exactly can be done to make them work? Before someone mentions indestructible POCOs: that doesn't mean you get a return on your investment, it just means that if someone does take it you can theoretically take it back, but since it'll be (or should be) small industrial corps with little firepower putting these up they can hardly take it back from either an alliance or even "just" a local pirate corp, can they?
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University
Ivy League
#1443 - 2011-10-25 18:28:06 UTC
Yes, I have been reading the thread - and I've continuously said that it's the planets used as P1 harvest planets (or P0->P2) which are going to have trouble paying for their POCOs because the baseline tariff is currently about 5x too low. Fix the tariffs on P1/P2 and suddenly the math starts to look a lot better, especially if you can use a smaller sized POCO and reduce your fuel needs on planets that are only used as P1/P2 harvest planets.

P3/P4 factory planets will easily pay for a POCO, but nobody is going to put one of those up in lo-sec without defenses.

Back to the numbers: Specifically factory planets.

P2 factory planet, consumes about 80 x 24 x 20 AIFs (38400) per day of P1 @ 0.38 ISK/u import under todays tariff rate and exports 5 x 24 x 20 AIFs (2400) per day of P2 @ 9.00 ISK/u. So that's 14592 ISK/day for P1 import fees and 21600 ISK/day for P2.

As said repeatedly, that number is about 5x lower then the other tier's effective tax rates.

Multiply those numbers by 5x and a P2 factory planet now produces 180,960 ISK/day @ 5% tariff. Be greedy and set a 50% tariff and that's now 1.8M/day in fees for every P2 factory planet running.

P3 factories - same setup w/ 20 AIFs - 20 x 24 x 20 AIFs (9600) or 30 x 24 x 20 AIFs (14400) of P2 inputs with an import tax of 4.50 ISK/u, output is 3 x 24 x 20 (1440) at 600 ISK/u. Giving a total tariff (5%) fee of 928,880 ISK/day. Be greedy there and set the tariff to 50% and you make 9M ISK/day for a P3 factory colony in fees.

Get a few P2/P3 factory colonies on a single world and you easily pay for a 80-100M POCO plus POS defenses plus the POS fuel costs needed to fuel a large POCO.

TL;DR (again) - P1/P2 proposed tariffs are too cheap and it's the P1 planets where you're going to have trouble paying enough to put up anything more then a small POCO.
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University
Ivy League
#1444 - 2011-10-25 18:32:59 UTC
Creat Posudol wrote:

Also it couldn't have a normal POS-Shield, which has also been discussed here, since you could either fly inside and just shoot the thing directly, or people don't have access so they can't do PI and the thing will lose even more money!


And when was the last time that you flew inside a POS shield bubble and tried to target something? Hint - if you're inside the shield, you can't target anything at all. (Smartbomb use against the POCO might be an issue...)

Again - if you have standings with the POCO, you can enter the shield - if you don't, then you can't enter the POCO shield and you wouldn't be able to use the POCO anyway. The permeability of the shield would have to be tied to POCO rules.

Casual PI bears will love a POCO with shields, because it gives them safety during the most vulnerable time - loading/unloading cargo from the POCO. Don't like it? Get standings to use the POCO, fly inside and bump them out of the shields, or setup a bubble outside (in null/w-space). Or catch them on the gates as they try to get out. It turns the customs offices in lo-sec from being death traps into something with a bit more safety. And you could charge a higher tax for the safety of being within the shield when picking up product.
Meldan Anstian
The Night Crew
#1445 - 2011-10-25 18:36:25 UTC
Creat Posudol wrote:

You misunderstood me completely there. I was saying that if the ATTACKERS (!!!) split up to attack multiple POCOs, putting one attacker at each non-primary target just for the mail(s) to cover the primary attack (as you suggested), then those lone attackers could be easily picked off one by one if the defenders do manage to get even a small defense fleet together. Nobody is gonna defend anything unless it is upon reinforcement exit, there are no defenders in your case!

Also throughout your replies you constantly seem to think that the increased interaction is supposed to occur at this point in the first place. It isn't - as I've already stated as well. That is what reinforcement is for, to have a time and a place to meet and have "interaction" Lol

If someone decides to shoot some POCOs just to generate some mails, let him. Who cares? Unless the POCO is reinforced nobody is gonna move. You can try to drop by if you happen to be in the vicinity, but just wait for him to reinforce it, and either fight him upon reinforcement exit, or rep up the shields enough so that reinforcement resets. Who cares about a couple of (or couple of dozen) mails?


Ahh, I understand better now. There is no reason for a lone player to attack a PCO and stick around awaiting a response from defenders. The purpose of him was to create confusion and generate uncertainty.

As we have both have stated, the current plan fails because there is not enough income or value in PCO's to make many people struggle to keep them alive after installing them. Attackers have incentive to attack them simply for kill mails and lols, but there is no financial incentive to do so.

You mention later in your response, income is about 5 mil a week and it would take 4 months to recover investment from a 80m PCO. No one would risk even a T1 BC to keep the PCO operational. Having 1 destroyed would extend payback another 2 months (depending on the BC and fit of course).

Scrapyard Bob had a good idea (believe he was the first to propose it) about making different sized PCO's. The problem is the economics fail on a basic level, and without changing the economy as a whole drastically, I don't see a way to make this idea (player owned CO's) work.

The concept is great, but the jury rig to make it work isn't working. Maybe we need someone with Jury rigging VI?
CCP Nullarbor
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1446 - 2011-10-25 18:53:19 UTC
Meldan Anstian wrote:
Creat Posudol wrote:

You misunderstood me completely there. I was saying that if the ATTACKERS (!!!) split up to attack multiple POCOs, putting one attacker at each non-primary target just for the mail(s) to cover the primary attack (as you suggested), then those lone attackers could be easily picked off one by one if the defenders do manage to get even a small defense fleet together. Nobody is gonna defend anything unless it is upon reinforcement exit, there are no defenders in your case!

Also throughout your replies you constantly seem to think that the increased interaction is supposed to occur at this point in the first place. It isn't - as I've already stated as well. That is what reinforcement is for, to have a time and a place to meet and have "interaction" Lol

If someone decides to shoot some POCOs just to generate some mails, let him. Who cares? Unless the POCO is reinforced nobody is gonna move. You can try to drop by if you happen to be in the vicinity, but just wait for him to reinforce it, and either fight him upon reinforcement exit, or rep up the shields enough so that reinforcement resets. Who cares about a couple of (or couple of dozen) mails?


Ahh, I understand better now. There is no reason for a lone player to attack a PCO and stick around awaiting a response from defenders. The purpose of him was to create confusion and generate uncertainty.


We put in a change today so that mails wont be generated unless you do at least some significant amount of damage. A lone rifter doing a drive by won't trigger it, because that would be annoying.

CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#1447 - 2011-10-25 19:15:21 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
We put in a change today so that mails wont be generated unless you do at least some significant amount of damage. A lone rifter doing a drive by won't trigger it, because that would be annoying.


Any changes as far as the initial supply? Simply removing the customs offices and waiting for the market to catch up in order to do effective PI again is crippling to say the least.

I like the idea of leaving the customs offices in place and having these supercede them if someone plants one, and the customs office coming back online if one's destroyed. It adds the flavor of people deciding to remove the ones that a hostile corp put up, even if they can't manage to put one up themselves. This at least allows some safeguards, some means for people to be able to fight for the right to do their own PI without corporate interference.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.
Kassasis Dakkstromri
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1448 - 2011-10-25 19:17:59 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Meldan Anstian wrote:
Creat Posudol wrote:

You misunderstood me completely there. I was saying that if the ATTACKERS (!!!) split up to attack multiple POCOs, putting one attacker at each non-primary target just for the mail(s) to cover the primary attack (as you suggested), then those lone attackers could be easily picked off one by one if the defenders do manage to get even a small defense fleet together. Nobody is gonna defend anything unless it is upon reinforcement exit, there are no defenders in your case!

Also throughout your replies you constantly seem to think that the increased interaction is supposed to occur at this point in the first place. It isn't - as I've already stated as well. That is what reinforcement is for, to have a time and a place to meet and have "interaction" Lol

If someone decides to shoot some POCOs just to generate some mails, let him. Who cares? Unless the POCO is reinforced nobody is gonna move. You can try to drop by if you happen to be in the vicinity, but just wait for him to reinforce it, and either fight him upon reinforcement exit, or rep up the shields enough so that reinforcement resets. Who cares about a couple of (or couple of dozen) mails?


Ahh, I understand better now. There is no reason for a lone player to attack a PCO and stick around awaiting a response from defenders. The purpose of him was to create confusion and generate uncertainty.


We put in a change today so that mails wont be generated unless you do at least some significant amount of damage. A lone rifter doing a drive by won't trigger it, because that would be annoying.



When should we be hearing from yourself or CCP Phantom (or even CCP Omen) regarding other adjustments that have been made/ will be made?

CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
CCP Nullarbor
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1449 - 2011-10-25 19:23:15 UTC
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Meldan Anstian wrote:
Creat Posudol wrote:

You misunderstood me completely there. I was saying that if the ATTACKERS (!!!) split up to attack multiple POCOs, putting one attacker at each non-primary target just for the mail(s) to cover the primary attack (as you suggested), then those lone attackers could be easily picked off one by one if the defenders do manage to get even a small defense fleet together. Nobody is gonna defend anything unless it is upon reinforcement exit, there are no defenders in your case!

Also throughout your replies you constantly seem to think that the increased interaction is supposed to occur at this point in the first place. It isn't - as I've already stated as well. That is what reinforcement is for, to have a time and a place to meet and have "interaction" Lol

If someone decides to shoot some POCOs just to generate some mails, let him. Who cares? Unless the POCO is reinforced nobody is gonna move. You can try to drop by if you happen to be in the vicinity, but just wait for him to reinforce it, and either fight him upon reinforcement exit, or rep up the shields enough so that reinforcement resets. Who cares about a couple of (or couple of dozen) mails?


Ahh, I understand better now. There is no reason for a lone player to attack a PCO and stick around awaiting a response from defenders. The purpose of him was to create confusion and generate uncertainty.


We put in a change today so that mails wont be generated unless you do at least some significant amount of damage. A lone rifter doing a drive by won't trigger it, because that would be annoying.



When should we be hearing from yourself or CCP Phantom (or even CCP Omen) regarding other adjustments that have been made/ will be made?


I believe Omen is working on another dev blog to explain some more changes and reiterate some of the answers we have given in this thread. No ETA on that just yet, as it depends on making sure we can actually get it all done first.

CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones
Henriette Malia Alette
Doomheim
#1450 - 2011-10-25 19:35:39 UTC
CCP - why do u keep screwing over the Small Corp that needs the PI for POS fuelling (f.ex) ?

Ever since u removed the click feast, AND lowered the output - High Sec PI wont generate enough (for POS fuel - fex) using 1 character with 6 CCs in high sec. The output even using 22 hour turns simply wont cut it..

So - you need to venture to low sec, but.. i guess thats not good enough punishment - to having to lurk around in a BR, waiting for the right moment to make the custom office run and get away before ganked - bcause now we also need to build our own little custom offices, just to see them get destroyed by anyone wandering bout beeing bored...

Honestly.. possible 25-?? % of youre player base are high sec bears, probably responsible for 70% of the industrial sector - yet we constantly are the one's getting hit in the face... u reward scamming, griefing, anything that goes towards destroying other people's playing experience, but never those that does the heavy lifting.. which actually play EVE for the PVE side... we getting a good solid **** on... and you are wondering why people are leaving, and new people arent joining?

Why dont you just turn all of EVE into Null and be done with it ? - surely you dont need the high sec bears accounts to keep eve alive and kicking.. im sure all the PVPplayers gladly pay double to make up for the industrials that left.. we nothing then a nuisence anyway... and besides - everyone will tell u EVE is all about PVP - right?


As far as im concerned.. u can keep the LCOs in null, and WHs and let the rest of us have our custom offices in peace...
Meldan Anstian
The Night Crew
#1451 - 2011-10-25 19:44:22 UTC
Scrapyard Bob wrote:
Yes, I have been reading the thread - and I've continuously said that it's the planets used as P1 harvest planets (or P0->P2) which are going to have trouble paying for their POCOs because the baseline tariff is currently about 5x too low. Fix the tariffs on P1/P2 and suddenly the math starts to look a lot better, especially if you can use a smaller sized POCO and reduce your fuel needs on planets that are only used as P1/P2 harvest planets.

P3/P4 factory planets will easily pay for a POCO, but nobody is going to put one of those up in lo-sec without defenses.

Back to the numbers: Specifically factory planets.

P2 factory planet, consumes about 80 x 24 x 20 AIFs (38400) per day of P1 @ 0.38 ISK/u import under todays tariff rate and exports 5 x 24 x 20 AIFs (2400) per day of P2 @ 9.00 ISK/u. So that's 14592 ISK/day for P1 import fees and 21600 ISK/day for P2.

As said repeatedly, that number is about 5x lower then the other tier's effective tax rates.

Multiply those numbers by 5x and a P2 factory planet now produces 180,960 ISK/day @ 5% tariff. Be greedy and set a 50% tariff and that's now 1.8M/day in fees for every P2 factory planet running.

P3 factories - same setup w/ 20 AIFs - 20 x 24 x 20 AIFs (9600) or 30 x 24 x 20 AIFs (14400) of P2 inputs with an import tax of 4.50 ISK/u, output is 3 x 24 x 20 (1440) at 600 ISK/u. Giving a total tariff (5%) fee of 928,880 ISK/day. Be greedy there and set the tariff to 50% and you make 9M ISK/day for a P3 factory colony in fees.

Get a few P2/P3 factory colonies on a single world and you easily pay for a 80-100M POCO plus POS defenses plus the POS fuel costs needed to fuel a large POCO.

TL;DR (again) - P1/P2 proposed tariffs are too cheap and it's the P1 planets where you're going to have trouble paying enough to put up anything more then a small POCO.


Why would anyone import anything to a 50% tax planet? You would haul it to high sec and pay 10% to import, 10% to export for a total of 20% (ignoring differences in product levels).

To the best of my knowledge, the most efficient way to do PI is extract P0 and make it P1 materials. Haul those P1 products to a manufacturing only planet and make any P2-P4 products you choose. The bottleneck in PI is extraction of P0 goods not manufacturing them to higher product levels.

So if you are going to use import taxes and export taxes of P2-P4 goods to base your economic model on, you need to use a competitive tax rate with high sec. Otherwise you will get false numbers.

If you need more production planets, make an alt, and with a week of training you have an alt with command centers 4, a decent capacity hauler and capable of manufacturing on 3 planets.

One thing that has not been suggested yet, is that we raise the tax rate in high sec to a very high rate. Bob's thoughts kinda gave me this idea. That would certainly help push people to low sec where PCO owners might be cheaper than high sec and it would ease economically justifying the PCO. The question is: can non high sec PCO's tax at a rate competitive with high sec CO's and not dramatically change the economy? Some numbers would have to be run to see if this would make sense. On the surface, it does make sense, unless I am not seeing something.
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#1452 - 2011-10-25 19:50:03 UTC
Meldan Anstian wrote:

One thing that has not been suggested yet, is that we raise the tax rate in high sec to a very high rate. Bob's thoughts kinda gave me this idea. That would certainly help push people to low sec ...


What? You actually believe you can force people into areas they don't want to be? Don't be ridiculous. People that don't want to go into low sec won't, regardless of the taxes. They'll simply either pay the taxes or drop PI instead. It's basic human nature... you're not going to force them. Instead you'll have a more disgruntled base that's even more likely to unsub.

Push them to low sec. Push them to null. Sheesh, what the hell are people thinking? All pushing will do is push them away.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University
Ivy League
#1453 - 2011-10-25 20:01:20 UTC
Meldan Anstian wrote:
You mention later in your response, income is about 5 mil a week and it would take 4 months to recover investment from a 80m PCO. No one would risk even a T1 BC to keep the PCO operational. Having 1 destroyed would extend payback another 2 months (depending on the BC and fit of course).


It's the central problem with the POCO concept. Any systems near hi-sec will suffer from a few issues:

- Hi-sec COs will only charge a 10% tariff.
- POCOs will have to charge much more then 10% in order to break even in under a month.
- This drives all P2/P3/P4 production to hi-sec POCOs.
- All that is left is tariffs on P1 harvest planets, which is not enough to pay for a POCO fast enough.
- Harvest planets can't support more then half a dozen colonies before they get over-populated and start generating poor returns from the ECUs.

The reason that I favor at least some sort of fuel cost is:

- If they are given shields and the abilities to anchor defenses, then they need to have fuel costs commiserate with a POS tower of the equivalent size. Otherwise they get used as cheap-POS towers for defense.
- That fuel cost could be made lower if the POCO cannot anchor things like SMAs, assembly arrays, corp hangars.
- A monthly fuel bill encourages owners to become landlords and not just use them as cheap planet denial.
- POCOs not maintained will go fallow and be easily destroyed.
- Monthly fuel consumption helps PI products stay in demand.

The issue, of course, is that unless tariffs are raised for P1/P2 and the tariff rate in hi-sec is made much higher then the 10% proposed level, POCOs won't be affordable as an income source, even before some sort of fuel cost is added.

Hi-sec tariff base of 60-70%, while it sounds harsh, would make the POCOs a more attractive proposition. It would mostly impact P3/P4 producers who pay the bulk of the fees. They would have to raise their prices by 30-50% in order to pay for the higher hi-sec tariff rate. But it would leave room for POCOs to compete on tariff level. It would encourage producers to make friends in a lo-sec pocket or move into a w-hole or null-sec in order to avoid the higher tariffs in hi-sec.

Maybe tariffs in hi-sec should be based loosely on the security status of the system. Where 1.0 systems might charge 75% with 0.5 systems charging only 50%. (Jita is 0.9, Amarr is 1.0, Dodixie is 0.9, but there are systems nearby with lower security status.)

The regen rate of PI worlds will have to be increased so that you can have up to 20-30 different PI colonies on the worlds before they run into trouble (instead of running into trouble at 6-12 colonies).
Kassasis Dakkstromri
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1454 - 2011-10-25 20:03:28 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Meldan Anstian wrote:
Creat Posudol wrote:

You misunderstood me completely there. I was saying that if the ATTACKERS (!!!) split up to attack multiple POCOs, putting one attacker at each non-primary target just for the mail(s) to cover the primary attack (as you suggested), then those lone attackers could be easily picked off one by one if the defenders do manage to get even a small defense fleet together. Nobody is gonna defend anything unless it is upon reinforcement exit, there are no defenders in your case!

Also throughout your replies you constantly seem to think that the increased interaction is supposed to occur at this point in the first place. It isn't - as I've already stated as well. That is what reinforcement is for, to have a time and a place to meet and have "interaction" Lol

If someone decides to shoot some POCOs just to generate some mails, let him. Who cares? Unless the POCO is reinforced nobody is gonna move. You can try to drop by if you happen to be in the vicinity, but just wait for him to reinforce it, and either fight him upon reinforcement exit, or rep up the shields enough so that reinforcement resets. Who cares about a couple of (or couple of dozen) mails?


Ahh, I understand better now. There is no reason for a lone player to attack a PCO and stick around awaiting a response from defenders. The purpose of him was to create confusion and generate uncertainty.


We put in a change today so that mails wont be generated unless you do at least some significant amount of damage. A lone rifter doing a drive by won't trigger it, because that would be annoying.



When should we be hearing from yourself or CCP Phantom (or even CCP Omen) regarding other adjustments that have been made/ will be made?


I believe Omen is working on another dev blog to explain some more changes and reiterate some of the answers we have given in this thread. No ETA on that just yet, as it depends on making sure we can actually get it all done first.



Great! I'm looking forward to it... 'no where to go but up' as they say...

And just for the sake of getting your post count up:

CCP Nullarbor: How long did it take to code the feature (as of PCO announcement last week)?

[Curious how many difficulties might be associated with additional coding that is being requested]

CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
Meldan Anstian
The Night Crew
#1455 - 2011-10-25 20:11:13 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Meldan Anstian wrote:

One thing that has not been suggested yet, is that we raise the tax rate in high sec to a very high rate. Bob's thoughts kinda gave me this idea. That would certainly help push people to low sec ...


What? You actually believe you can force people into areas they don't want to be? Don't be ridiculous. People that don't want to go into low sec won't, regardless of the taxes. They'll simply either pay the taxes or drop PI instead. It's basic human nature... you're not going to force them. Instead you'll have a more disgruntled base that's even more likely to unsub.

Push them to low sec. Push them to null. Sheesh, what the hell are people thinking? All pushing will do is push them away.


There is no reason people couldnt stay in high sec and produce, just like they do now. Low sec could be more profitable, like it is now.

If the new taxes cause the price of robotics to go up to the current 75k or so (up from the 50-60k in the near past) I don't think that is a huge issue and the economy will adjust to it. If the price were 500k for robotics, thats not so easy to adjust to.
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University
Ivy League
#1456 - 2011-10-25 20:24:12 UTC
Market impact estimates:

Based on historical prices, here's is about what we currently pay under the current tariff system for exporting products via a customs office (supposedly equivalent to the "5%" tariff rate under the new system).

- Taxes on P0 are 0.10 on items that are worth about 1.00-2.00 ISK (so a 5-10% tax rate).
- P1 pays 0.76 ISK on stuff that is worth 300-500 ISK (before the price spike), or about 0.15-0.25% tax rate
- P2 pays 9 ISK and is worth 2500-4000, about a 0.22-0.36% tax rate
- P3 pays 600 ISK on stuff that sells for 25000-45000, a 1.3-2.4% rate
- P4 pays 50,000 ISK on stuff that sells for 600k to 1100k, 4.5% to 8.3% rate

Let's assume that hi-sec COs now charge 75% (15x increase in tariff over today). Remember that since tariffs are fixed on a per-unit basis, as the results go up in market value that you pay a smaller percentage in import/export fees.

P0 - goes from 5-10% to 75% to 150% paid as a percentage of value. Not a huge deal, because hardly anyone exports P0 anyway. But the prices on raw P0 would have to go up a fair amount. Probably into the 3-5 ISK/u range instead of 1-2 ISK/u. Basically, exporting P0 to make into P1 on another world would become even more of a losing proposition then it is now.

P1 - goes from 0.15-0.25% to 2.25% to 3.75% as a percentage of market value. Not big deal, but definitely well under what the other tiers are paying. So the prices for P1 would not go up much at all, even if tariffs for this tier went up another 5x (into the 11.25-18.75% range).

P2 - goes from 0.22-0.36% to 3.30% to 5.40% as a percentage of market value. Again, not a big change. If those tariffs were increased by 4x to bring them in line with the other tiers, you'd be looking at 13.2% to 21.6% in fees as a percentage of the current market value. So the P2s would have to go up about 30-40% to cover the tariffs and the higher input costs from the previous tier. Those who are willing to deal with POCOs that have a lower tariff rate would make more profit.

P3 - Would get hit a bit harder, 1.3-2.4% -> 19.5% to 36%, so P3 would have to go up a good 50-60% in market price to deal with a hi-sec tariff. Naturally, this makes some other things more expensive, but it's not the end of the world. Many P3s were already rising in cost anyway over the past few months. More of a nuisance and higher prices are not always enjoyable. But any POCO owner in lo/null who can convince others to setup a P3/P4 factory planet on their world will be making ISK hand over fist.

P4 - Gets hit very hard, because their fees in relation to the market value of the output was already high at 4.5-8.3%. A 15x increase there will result in P4 that goes up by about 3x in cost. Since P4 tariffs were already high, they should be cut in half which would result in only a 7.5x increase. That would put the tariff at around 33.75% to 62.25% of historical market value. Still high, but P4s would have to only increase their prices by about 80-100% over historical norms.

Some side-effects:

- Sov structures will become about 2x more expensive
- The monthly POS fuel bill will go up about 20-30% (probably 400/mo for a large tower)
- Going from P1 -> P4 on a single planet or from P2 -> P4 on a single planet would save a lot in fees.
Kassasis Dakkstromri
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1457 - 2011-10-25 20:29:38 UTC
Meldan Anstian wrote:
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Meldan Anstian wrote:

One thing that has not been suggested yet, is that we raise the tax rate in high sec to a very high rate. Bob's thoughts kinda gave me this idea. That would certainly help push people to low sec ...


What? You actually believe you can force people into areas they don't want to be? Don't be ridiculous. People that don't want to go into low sec won't, regardless of the taxes. They'll simply either pay the taxes or drop PI instead. It's basic human nature... you're not going to force them. Instead you'll have a more disgruntled base that's even more likely to unsub.

Push them to low sec. Push them to null. Sheesh, what the hell are people thinking? All pushing will do is push them away.


There is no reason people couldnt stay in high sec and produce, just like they do now. Low sec could be more profitable, like it is now.

If the new taxes cause the price of robotics to go up to the current 75k or so (up from the 50-60k in the near past) I don't think that is a huge issue and the economy will adjust to it. If the price were 500k for robotics, thats not so easy to adjust to.


Robotics could never sustain a price of 500k ISK per unit ... that bubble would collapse really quickly.

But it would make P4 commodities like OMA's shoot up to 10x its current price ... yummy P

CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
bilingi
Grandeur Illusions
#1458 - 2011-10-25 20:55:54 UTC  |  Edited by: bilingi
Do any of you play the game?

Share resources. Let others use faciltys for profit? HAHAHAHAHA

They spent years say a cold harsh universe encourageing backstabbing griefing and etc.... And they want to introduce something that means you have to trust some unknown stranger...

I mean its not like their are spies, corp thieves, gank alts, and LOL Butholes in the game now is there?..

Either that or the really stupid people are posting on this thread...Idea


Seriously do you people even read the Bullcrap your posting? Shocked
rootimus maximus
Perkone
Caldari State
#1459 - 2011-10-25 22:21:15 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:
What? You actually believe you can force people into areas they don't want to be? Don't be ridiculous. People that don't want to go into low sec won't, regardless of the taxes. They'll simply either pay the taxes or drop PI instead.


Good. The quicker you stop producing, the quicker I start making increased profit.



bilingi wrote:
Share resources. Let others use faciltys for profit? HAHAHAHAHA
I mean its not like their are spies, corp thieves, gank alts, and LOL Butholes in the game now is there?..


Ah, so there's only one type of person that plays Eve? In that case, how do you explain all the whiny carebears complaining about getting ganked or the price of isotopes? If it's in my corp / alliance's interest to make customs stations available to al then I'm all for it.

Scrapyard Bob wrote:

- Hi-sec COs will only charge a 10% tariff.
- POCOs will have to charge much more then 10% in order to break even in under a month.
- This drives all P2/P3/P4 production to hi-sec POCOs.
- All that is left is tariffs on P1 harvest planets, which is not enough to pay for a POCO fast enough.
- Harvest planets can't support more then half a dozen colonies before they get over-populated and start generating poor returns from the ECUs.


Why is there so much emphasis from many people in this thread on the speed of payback? I recently trained all the skills for a cap ship to IV. If I go back and train them all from IV to V I'm looking at nearly a year, which is fine because this isn't modern warfail 3 with instant gratification included as a feature. Sure, the office may get taken out, but unless some very bored muppets drop a bunch of caps on it, corps should be able to defend their property.

Production being driven to highsec isn't an issue either. There's always someone to fill any gap in demand and reap any increased profits.
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University
Ivy League
#1460 - 2011-10-25 22:33:51 UTC
The reason people focus on the payback period is because, as proposed so far by the CCP devs, these things will have not a lot of HP and zero defenses. Which means that, just like a small POS tower in lo-sec, they're likely to have the lifespan of a gnat.

If your POCO costs you 80M ISK, gets blown up every month, and you only make 10M ISK in taxes each month... how long before you stop replacing it?

Pessimistic view is that these will last about 2 weeks before dying, a more optimistic view is 2-4 months. But if they are given defenses on the scale of a large POS tower, then they'll survive for about as long as an existing large POS tower does in hi-sec (which can be a rather long time). Maybe slightly less, because there are fewer planets then moons so more competition for spots.