These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next page
 

Increase Isk Sinks
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
AKA Mordiki
Perkone
Caldari State
#1 - 2013-11-27 16:16:49 UTC
So I was changing the prices on some market orders and saw that broker fee for changing your price is only 100 isk. This looks to have not changed in 10 years. I think the cost should be based on the cost of the item being sold.

Less than 100k = 100
100k-1m = 1k
1m-10m= 10k
10m-100m= 100k
100m-1b=1m

I also think that the cost of using public build slots should go up as well based on the cost of the materials used to put the job in.

I know this wont be popular but we also know everyone will just raise the prices of their stuff for sale to compensate for the change. There is no shortage of isk in the economy that these would hurt even small builders, traders etc.

FLAME ON
Electrique Wizard
Mutually Lucrative Business Proposals
#2 - 2013-11-27 16:18:47 UTC
how about we just have concord gank anyone caught ganking without a valid mining permit?

I am the Zodiac, I am the stars, You are the sorceress, my priestess of Mars, Queen of the night, swathed in satin black, Your ivory flesh upon my torture rack.
AKA Mordiki
Perkone
Caldari State
#3 - 2013-11-27 16:26:33 UTC
I thought CCP already removed insurance payouts for convicted gankers along with a harsher faction penalty
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
#4 - 2013-11-27 16:57:39 UTC
AKA Mordiki wrote:
So I was changing the prices on some market orders and saw that broker fee for changing your price is only 100 isk. This looks to have not changed in 10 years. I think the cost should be based on the cost of the item being sold.

Less than 100k = 100
100k-1m = 1k
1m-10m= 10k
10m-100m= 100k
100m-1b=1m

I also think that the cost of using public build slots should go up as well based on the cost of the materials used to put the job in.

I know this wont be popular but we also know everyone will just raise the prices of their stuff for sale to compensate for the change. There is no shortage of isk in the economy that these would hurt even small builders, traders etc.

FLAME ON

It was suggested numerous times already but in a bit different form: apply full broker fees on every market order change, but allow to change volume of goods in order. This way older pilots can take advantage of better skills and standings and play "0.01 isk war" a bit longer (not by much) than newer players, but overall that would remove market 0.01isk bots because after 4-5 order changes it ceases to be profitable.

Opinions are like assholes. Everybody got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks.
Verity Sovereign
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#5 - 2013-11-27 17:21:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Verity Sovereign
AKA Mordiki wrote:
I also think that the cost of using public build slots should go up as well based on the cost of the materials used to put the job in.


I would make it so that stations which perpetually have all of theirslots of a given type used up, raise the rates in response.

If a station has all its copy slots occupied for on average the next 30 days, it raises the rates more than a station that has all its slots full, but on average, most are only taken for a week,
And a station with perpetually empty slots doesn't increase its rates at all.

Of course, we are talking copy, research, and build slots.

I also like the idea of "customs fees" for when you move certain goods across empire space.

One could use WHs, or low sec gates, to avoid paying the fees (or do like drugs, don't pay, just evade the customs agents)

You could also add station rent/use fees in highly used systems *cough* Jita *cough*

Or you could add certain items to Pirate and Caldari LP stores, that don't actually require any LP... after all, criminals and capitalists will do anything for enough money :p
AKA Mordiki
Perkone
Caldari State
#6 - 2013-11-28 01:02:18 UTC
Verity Sovereign wrote:
AKA Mordiki wrote:
I also think that the cost of using public build slots should go up as well based on the cost of the materials used to put the job in.


I would make it so that stations which perpetually have all of theirslots of a given type used up, raise the rates in response.

If a station has all its copy slots occupied for on average the next 30 days, it raises the rates more than a station that has all its slots full, but on average, most are only taken for a week,
And a station with perpetually empty slots doesn't increase its rates at all.


Another great idea.. CCP take note of this thread :-)
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#7 - 2013-11-28 01:13:41 UTC
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris wrote:

It was suggested numerous times already but in a bit different form: apply full broker fees on every market order change, but allow to change volume of goods in order. This way older pilots can take advantage of better skills and standings and play "0.01 isk war" a bit longer (not by much) than newer players, but overall that would remove market 0.01isk bots because after 4-5 order changes it ceases to be profitable.

That would actually make a significant sink as well as change the way people consider their pricing. And you are right, it would destroy 0.01 isk bots.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#8 - 2013-11-28 01:26:02 UTC
A long time ago, CCP noticeably raised the fees for using NPC industry slots. They even came up with a suitable - and appropriate - RP reason for the increase.

There's no reason they can't - or shouldn't - do both of these things again.
Gigan Amilupar
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#9 - 2013-11-28 01:40:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Gigan Amilupar
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
A long time ago, CCP noticeably raised the fees for using NPC industry slots. They even came up with a suitable - and appropriate - RP reason for the increase.

There's no reason they can't - or shouldn't - do both of these things again.


Empires are raising the tax on brokers, traders and manufacturers due to the loss of control of customs offices all over the cluster. Boom, there's your RP reason.
novellus
The Special Snowflakes
#10 - 2013-11-28 04:13:26 UTC  |  Edited by: novellus
I like to pretend that the people trading in station are perpetually hunched over their computers, furiously checking all their buy/sell orders 23/7.

I feel like I'm giving them the finger when I 0.01 ISK them. It's glorious.

There is no such thing as bots. There can't be. It all would have been for a lie.

Or you could just do it like how the real market does it: Have a bid, then have your "lowest possible bid" and if someone outbids you, then cool. Then have a 1 hour timer where you can't change that order again (and it's sorted as being grayed out or something so you can visually identify what you can and can't modifiy).

Gets rid of 0.01 ISK botters and drives a realistic, healthy competitive market -- one that is less focused on checking orders every half-hour.
Simc0m
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2013-11-28 17:49:11 UTC
AKA Mordiki wrote:
Verity Sovereign wrote:

I would make it so that stations which perpetually have all of theirslots of a given type used up, raise the rates in response.

If a station has all its copy slots occupied for on average the next 30 days, it raises the rates more than a station that has all its slots full, but on average, most are only taken for a week,
And a station with perpetually empty slots doesn't increase its rates at all.

Another great idea.. CCP take note of this thread :-)

Yep, this is a solid suggestion, I think it requires its own post. Someone make it happen, I'm feeling lazy.
Yolo
Unknown Nation
#12 - 2013-11-28 19:01:20 UTC
Market tax in a faction area should be based on amount of concord interventions, so they are higher in constellations with more ganks and the highest in system where this happens frequently.

Meaning Jita would be expensive, but other systems outside of high traffic areas would be cheaper.

- since 2003, bitches
Ronny Hugo
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#13 - 2013-11-29 08:46:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Ronny Hugo
Verity Sovereign wrote:
AKA Mordiki wrote:
I also think that the cost of using public build slots should go up as well based on the cost of the materials used to put the job in.


I would make it so that stations which perpetually have all of theirslots of a given type used up, raise the rates in response.

If a station has all its copy slots occupied for on average the next 30 days, it raises the rates more than a station that has all its slots full, but on average, most are only taken for a week,
And a station with perpetually empty slots doesn't increase its rates at all.

Of course, we are talking copy, research, and build slots.


The amount of sense in this post is too darn high! Effective pricing is a tool we use in all aspects of the real world, +1 to putting it in EVE. But then we also need some thing that makes us able to shop around for cheap stations (that then have the lowest qeue time).
AKA Mordiki
Perkone
Caldari State
#14 - 2013-11-29 20:03:32 UTC
So many great ideas here that everyone seems to agree with so far. Now to get someone from CSM or CCP to see this thread, any suggestions?
Simc0m
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2013-11-29 20:15:01 UTC
AKA Mordiki wrote:
So many great ideas here that everyone seems to agree with so far. Now to get someone from CSM or CCP to see this thread, any suggestions?
From my experience CCP almost never responds to these threads, but I think they do read them (at least the popular ones) because I have seen SO MANY ideas from this forum implemented in the game. Maybe it's coincidence, but I think/hope that they do actually read this forum.
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#16 - 2013-11-29 20:18:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Hops
Not sure everybody would like the long term outcomes of this.

You really need to analyze things a bit more.

If you raise the cost of manufacturing goods in EVE, you really just raise the price of goods overall. The manufacturers will pass that increase of price onto the buyers. They won't just let that tax cut into their profits.

So everything goes up in price a bit. The market will respond to this by generating more ISK through the faucets (missions and bounties) until equilibrium is reached.

Basically, I would predict that player activities would shift slightly towards ISK faucets to overcome the sinks..

I can't see this having an actual effect on inflation. It will cause a sequence of snowballing events in how players as a group behave, but there might not be much notable difference in how individual players behave.

edit:

also, posting in a stealth buff-POS-manufacturing-in-highsec thread.
Seranova Farreach
Biomass Negative
#17 - 2013-11-29 20:42:25 UTC
AKA Mordiki wrote:
I thought CCP already removed insurance payouts for convicted gankers along with a harsher faction penalty

im not 100% sure but didnt they add the CONCORDOKKEN loss to killmails too?

[u]___________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg[/u]
Linkxsc162534
Silent Scourge
#18 - 2013-11-29 21:28:58 UTC
I dunno guys, Everyone always talks about making more isk sinks, and making the existing ones bigger.
Why not just turn the faucet down
Less Bounties from Rats (hits missioners and low/null ratters/plexers)
Knock incursions down, either that or make them much stronger. More ships should be blown up by incursions then are happening right now.

Less overall money generated in game. Instead shift a portion of PVE income to more module drops and such.
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
#19 - 2013-11-29 23:47:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Linkxsc162534 wrote:
I dunno guys, Everyone always talks about making more isk sinks, and making the existing ones bigger.
Why not just turn the faucet down
Less Bounties from Rats (hits missioners and low/null ratters/plexers)
Knock incursions down, either that or make them much stronger. More ships should be blown up by incursions then are happening right now.

Less overall money generated in game. Instead shift a portion of PVE income to more module drops and such.

Not going to work. Because of inflation and prices rising CCP has to adjust (increase, add new) isk faucets. Decreasing them now will make a lot of players unhappy. On other hand reasonable increase in ISK sink will most likely be accepted.

As for more module drop. It is a bad game design that CCP had to fix it twice already: by removing meta0 modules from drop and by removing alloys from drones. All that because it devalues one of cornerstone professions in game - mining.
There was suggestion before that completely "fixed" gun mining along with some other issues:
- make meta1+/faction/DS/officer modules drop in "broken" state
- to fix them you need meta0 analog of that module and some ISK .
- restored module will have same meta as "broken" one.
- refining broken modules yields little to no minerals.

This suggestion deals with gun mining (boosts miners), boosts T1 industry, introduces new isk sink and overall makes sense (why would NPC ships have undamaged assorted packaged modules in their wrecks after explosion?). The downsides are
- it will reduce loot value greatly resulting in reduced income for some(newer) players.
- it will double the amount of items in game (and on market if "broken" items are made sell-able there).

Opinions are like assholes. Everybody got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks.
Nightwing
Celestial Horizon Corp.
#20 - 2013-11-30 16:02:20 UTC
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris wrote:
Linkxsc162534 wrote:
I dunno guys, Everyone always talks about making more isk sinks, and making the existing ones bigger.
Why not just turn the faucet down
Less Bounties from Rats (hits missioners and low/null ratters/plexers)
Knock incursions down, either that or make them much stronger. More ships should be blown up by incursions then are happening right now.

Less overall money generated in game. Instead shift a portion of PVE income to more module drops and such.

Not going to work. Because of inflation and prices rising CCP has to adjust (increase, add new) isk faucets. Decreasing them now will make a lot of players unhappy. On other hand reasonable increase in ISK sink will most likely be accepted.

As for more module drop. It is a bad game design that CCP had to fix it twice already: by removing meta0 modules from drop and by removing alloys from drones. All that because it devalues one of cornerstone professions in game - mining.
There was suggestion before that completely "fixed" gun mining along with some other issues:
- make meta1+/faction/DS/officer modules drop in "broken" state
- to fix them you need meta0 analog of that module and some ISK .
- restored module will have same meta as "broken" one.
- refining broken modules yields little to no minerals.

This suggestion deals with gun mining (boosts miners), boosts T1 industry, introduces new isk sink and overall makes sense (why would NPC ships have undamaged assorted packaged modules in their wrecks after explosion?). The downsides are
- it will reduce loot value greatly resulting in reduced income for some(newer) players.
- it will double the amount of items in game (and on market if "broken" items are made sell-able there).


I like the idea of using the crap salvage to fix broken meta modules.
123Next page