These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 Offices: An update!

First post First post
Author
Sarina Berghil
New Zion Judge Advocate
#661 - 2011-12-02 13:39:56 UTC
@ CCP Omen

I don't disagree that the old taxes were extremely small, and few people seemed to complain at double tax rates. This is probably proof that they were way too low.

But did you take into account how often goods are taxed? I wouldn't know the numbers myself, but I can imagine P4 goods get taxed quite a few times during their life cycle.

A 10-17% tax rate seems massive for something that might get double-dipped by taxes several times over.
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#662 - 2011-12-02 13:47:02 UTC
Sarina Berghil wrote:
@ CCP Omen

I don't disagree that the old taxes were extremely small, and few people seemed to complain at double tax rates. This is probably proof that they were way too low.

But did you take into account how often goods are taxed? I wouldn't know the numbers myself, but I can imagine P4 goods get taxed quite a few times during their life cycle.

A 10-17% tax rate seems massive for something that might get double-dipped by taxes several times over.


For me, and many I know, P0 is process to P1 on gathering planets. These P1 products (reactive metals, etc.) are then sent to a different planet for further processing. So basically the materials are winding up being taxed three times... export as P1, import as P1 and export as refined... P2 thru P4 depending.

For example, 5000 precious metals cost you about 1M in taxes before they even start refining to P2 and up, then you get screwed again exporting the final products.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.

Nekopyat
Nee-Co
#663 - 2011-12-02 13:48:25 UTC
CCP Guard wrote:
Hey guys.

Some of you have rightly pointed out that this last tax rate change should have been better communicated and I just want to clear that part up. We did have a plan to communicate it properly and the Game Designers had the text ready, but then the ball got dropped between us in the middle of the messaging storm prior to launch. I guess that one's on me.

I know that "I was totally gonna" doesn't make up for not doing something, but I want to extend my apologies for any inconvenience and confusion this caused.

The designers will probably jump in and take some questions on the mechanics.


While I know many probably do think 'this is not good enough', I actually do applaud a dev for jumping in and making such a statement. I know how balls can get dropped in the crunch before a major release and can empthize.

I think the real test though will come from how CCP actually addresses the concerns. I think some have merit behind them and might point out cases/play styles CCP did not think of or, more likely, group-think kinda hid. CCP's dev team has always had an internal bais towards a particular playstyle/endgame and can get really excited about how new features can fit into that goal... and sometimes forget that a big piece of the playerbase are very different from them.
CCP Omen
C C P
C C P Alliance
#664 - 2011-12-02 13:49:50 UTC
Jade Nexia wrote:
"CCP Omen" wrote:

Before I try and meet your specific questions and concerns I just want to say that we are sorry for the inconvenience you experienced with the misleading patch notes and the lack of information regarding the tariff changes. There are no arguments against better information.

We are not the “old CCP” that try to trick you, I’d argue the opposite, the lack of proper and accurate information was brought because we changed the POCO feature three times based on player feedback. Did we take it too far this time? Some will argue that but we feel the feature is better prepared for the long run now.

Borrowing the comparison from Abramul and adding what I think is the missing component to such a comparison, the market price.

P0: 0.1 isk/unit -> 0.5 isk/unit -> 3.81 (Noble Metals at market)
P1: 0.76 isk/unit -> 50 isk/unit -> 475 (Electrolytes at market)
P2: 9 isk/unit -> 900 isk/unit -> 9.715 (Mechanical parts at market)
P3: 600 isk/unit -> 7000 isk/unit -> 70.011 (Robotics at market)
P4: 50000 isk/unit -> 135000 isk/unit -> 1.301.000 (Broadcast node at market)

The difference between the old tax and the market price is what we reacted to. Yes the relative tax change is monstrous but the actual tax change is more like “no tax” - > “tax”.

It is beyond any doubt that the amount of ISK you pay for doing PI has increased drastically, but our line is unchanged, that the previous costs had become invalid.

One of the mistakes we are absolutely guilty of is not noticing how low the taxes had become since launch of Tyrannis. This was pointed out to us at the very last moment by player feedback to the second dev blog

The Tyrannis taxes were set as a percentage of the NPC sell orders that was how planetary commodities used to enter the game pre Tyrannis. As Market prices rose, the tax base did not, effectively making it cheaper and more profitable by the day to do PI without risk. They keyword here is without risk. Players could effectively opt out of playing Internet Spaceship Game, and still make a fortune. We want players to make fortunes when there is risk, spaceships and politics involved.

I will continue to answer your questions in this thread.
Regards
CCP Omen


Dear Omen. You did pick as taxation base most expensive PI producs and bad time, after announce of POCO prices hyperinflate. Did you moticed that 80% products are soled under 50% peice markup of your picked goods? Like Electrolytes? I' do my PI harvesting over 7 months and average price for electolytes was around 300 not 450. Not to mention other comodities like bacteria with average price around 80?

That just for my part of P1 producs because I never was interested in higher PI producs, because is just pain in ass to operate PI, setup factory, route product, route materials to factory etc. there is no easy interface for PI. I think that will be target when you announced changes in PI, to simplify UI make it less clicky. Posibility to setup more factories per one click, automatic production routing like automatic feeding with resources to factory from launchpad. Posibility to use and move goods to Storage from Launchpad not by using expeditions, reuse of command center. ETC. PI need whole big rework, but you did pick up completely unnecessary thing like POCO. Please learn to listen, right?


It is entirely possible that the tax base has to be tuned after further investigation the same way as we re-balance other stuff. The foundation in market prices will however not likely change.

Regards
Omen

Senior Game Designer Team True Grit EVE/DUST Gameplay Liaison

Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#665 - 2011-12-02 13:50:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Jack Dant
Sarina Berghil wrote:
But did you take into account how often goods are taxed? I wouldn't know the numbers myself, but I can imagine P4 goods get taxed quite a few times during their life cycle.

A 10-17% tax rate seems massive for something that might get double-dipped by taxes several times over.

Each import/export step adds 1.5 times the taxed amount, so yea, it gets passed on quite a bit.

At first I thought this was a bad idea, but on the other hand, it encourages export of P2 instead of P1 from your harvest planet, discouraging massive strip mining and allowing for more people per planet (see a few posts up, where someone is talking about basically slash and burn agriculture, depleting planets with a single colony then moving on).

What happens in lowsec, stays in lowsec, lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=476644&#post476644

CCP Omen
C C P
C C P Alliance
#666 - 2011-12-02 13:51:24 UTC
Jarnis McPieksu wrote:
The fact that you cannot retrieve and redeploy PI hardware is a major issue. POCO doesn't feel like an investment if you cannot take it down.

Compared to this, in POS reaction business all hardware that is used can be relocated and reused. You pay for the JF fuel and for the POS running costs, but relocation never means loss of production hardware.

Fix this for PI and I'm sure people are a lot more happy putting up ISKies for POCO hardware (and taking risks in low/null sec with command centers).

Also with POSes you can abandon the hardware "dead in space" for later restart, with PI you are limited by number of planets you can have command centers on, so you cannot abandon CCs/factories and set up elsewhere, only to return to the initial place at a later date.


I like this. What you can currently do is try and find a "buyer" and use the "Transfer ownership" function to transfer the ownership.
Regards
Omen

Senior Game Designer Team True Grit EVE/DUST Gameplay Liaison

CCP Omen
C C P
C C P Alliance
#667 - 2011-12-02 13:52:37 UTC
Jack Dant wrote:
Omen,

I advocated and support the tax change, because otherwise the POCO feature would have been dead in the water. It was a very welcome reaction.

However, I think basing it on the november prices was a minor oversight. By then, prices had already spiked due to speculation caused by your own devblog. Because it was speculation, and not an actual market adjustment, it didn't affect all items equally.

The effect of this is minor, but it does unbalance how much it costs to export an item vs how it costs to export the materials to build it, for example.


Thank you, this is very constructive feedback that we will look into!
Regards
Omen

Senior Game Designer Team True Grit EVE/DUST Gameplay Liaison

Nekopyat
Nee-Co
#668 - 2011-12-02 13:52:39 UTC
Jarnis McPieksu wrote:
The fact that you cannot retrieve and redeploy PI hardware is a major issue. POCO doesn't feel like an investment if you cannot take it down.

Compared to this, in POS reaction business all hardware that is used can be relocated and reused. You pay for the JF fuel and for the POS running costs, but relocation never means loss of production hardware.

Fix this for PI and I'm sure people are a lot more happy putting up ISKies for POCO hardware (and taking risks in low/null sec with command centers).

Also with POSes you can abandon the hardware "dead in space" for later restart, with PI you are limited by number of planets you can have command centers on, so you cannot abandon CCs/factories and set up elsewhere, only to return to the initial place at a later date.


I was actually very surprised that only the command centers were market items, and all the other PI units just sort of came out of nowhere and had to be destroyed and repurchased to move.

Maybe it is because of the Dust link.. but I kept hoping that they would just add defenses and make planetary objects targetable (thus vulnerable to wardecs) and actual infrastructure buildable/movable. PI, as it stands.. does not really seem to 'fit' EvE
Sarina Berghil
New Zion Judge Advocate
#669 - 2011-12-02 13:57:01 UTC
Jack Dant wrote:
Sarina Berghil wrote:
But did you take into account how often goods are taxed? I wouldn't know the numbers myself, but I can imagine P4 goods get taxed quite a few times during their life cycle.

A 10-17% tax rate seems massive for something that might get double-dipped by taxes several times over.

Each import/export step adds 1.5 times the taxed amount, so yea, it gets passed on quite a bit.

At first I thought this was a bad idea, but on the other hand, it encourages export of P2 instead of P1 from your harvest planet, discouraging massive strip mining and allowing for more people per planet (see a few posts up, where someone is talking about basically slash and burn agriculture, depleting planets with a single colony then moving on).


Thats something I thought of as well, it does encourage more varied approaches of how to setup installations. More variables in the equation can be a good thing.

Still when a P4 item is sold, 30% of the price is probably taxes. It seems massive to me, and I can't help worry a bit at what it will do to related industries and activities. I don't think Eve has seen that kind of taxation before.
CCP Omen
C C P
C C P Alliance
#670 - 2011-12-02 13:57:02 UTC
Sarina Berghil wrote:
@ CCP Omen

I don't disagree that the old taxes were extremely small, and few people seemed to complain at double tax rates. This is probably proof that they were way too low.

But did you take into account how often goods are taxed? I wouldn't know the numbers myself, but I can imagine P4 goods get taxed quite a few times during their life cycle.

A 10-17% tax rate seems massive for something that might get double-dipped by taxes several times over.


We did take that into account but if we did it successfully, only time will tell. There is a 50% discount to import that is a little hard to spot so that helps a bit. Secondly, we have done some simulations in excel and there are some interesting opportunities to optimize your PI setup to minimize the amount of import/exports nececarry. We beleive you will figure this out and perhaps even enjoy doing it.

What we also hope will happen is that cheap lowsec POCOs are used to assemble the most expensive parts and thereby spreading the risk between highsec and lowsec but that's just me speculating.

Regards
Omen

Senior Game Designer Team True Grit EVE/DUST Gameplay Liaison

Nekopyat
Nee-Co
#671 - 2011-12-02 13:58:27 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Sarina Berghil wrote:

A 10-17% tax rate seems massive for something that might get double-dipped by taxes several times over.


For me, and many I know, P0 is process to P1 on gathering planets. These P1 products (reactive metals, etc.) are then sent to a different planet for further processing. So basically the materials are winding up being taxed three times... export as P1, import as P1 and export as refined... P2 thru P4 depending.

For example, 5000 precious metals cost you about 1M in taxes before they even start refining to P2 and up, then you get screwed again exporting the final products.


This is one of the things I think is a significant concern, since for hi sec at least this change wipes out specialization of planets.. factory worlds are now much more expensive to operate.

In the real world, this is generally handled by a finer grained tariff system, where goods are only really taxed when they leave the final stage for market.

Hrm.... I wonder if this could be solved by adding a 'transfer between worlds' option.. maybe an alternative to the spaceport, with a rate based off volume rather then value (since it is an intermediate product that is not being transported for sale)... or maybe a 'package for transfer' option that results in blocks of goods that can only be imported back to other world and have no market value (or can not even be put on the market), so exporting/importing those are cheap.

This is how real life states tend to handle this situation. But taxing the value of goods being transported within a company from remote factory to remote factory? That would be insane.
Thermos Cavy
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#672 - 2011-12-02 13:58:33 UTC
=troll warning=

From stolen tape:

=ssshhhhh...=

Goons Chief: Hey CCP, we need more meat in lowsec!
CCP: So what?
Goons chief: We wont buy plexes and we will ruin all if you wont do anything with that!
CCP: Maybe we launch POCO and ruin PI stuff market?
Goons chief: Not bad, but we need more from you.
CCP: Maybe we will help you with market spec on Heavy water, Oxy iso and Polytextiles?
Goons chief: We are not interested in Polytextiles at the moment.

=shhhhhh...=

=/troll warning=



Sarina Berghil
New Zion Judge Advocate
#673 - 2011-12-02 14:02:47 UTC
CCP Omen wrote:

We did take that into account but if we did it successfully, only time will tell. There is a 50% discount to import that is a little hard to spot so that helps a bit. Secondly, we have done some simulations in excel and there are some interesting opportunities to optimize your PI setup to minimize the amount of import/exports nececarry. We beleive you will figure this out and perhaps even enjoy doing it.


I did notice some interesting opportunities, thats the positive side :-)

I'm not really worried about PI as a profession, I think theres a lot of profit to be made at least for now, I'm more worried about what it does to the rest of the economy. But thats mostly unfounded speculation on my part.
CCP Omen
C C P
C C P Alliance
#674 - 2011-12-02 14:05:06 UTC
Jade Nexia wrote:
I'm stick with my feel that CCP has no clue about PI and how they did setup planetary resources.

I'm pure P1 producer who sell it to market. I now with 17% tax does pay daily 1mil per planet for export. I operate at rich planets in C1,C2 and C3 WH with direct connection into HigSec (static exists). I do operate with 9 characters on 45 planets each character is setup in own WH-space.

I harvest each planet in WH-space no longer than 20 days, because planets goes depleted! Notice this planet get depleted after 20 days! Production per head goes from 300 under 200. Even I do move my extractor or rebuild whole site every 5 to 6 days I got planet depleted after 20 days. My skills in Planetology and Advanced Planetology are on level 5 and all 9 characters. I must leave WH and find another one WH with not used planets at least once per month.

Per whole my harvesting period I would only pay up to 25 mil per planet when I do accept 17% Interbus Taxes. I have no reason to put up any POCO worth 200mil simply because I can't pack it up when I don't use planet anymore.

20 day WH cycle cost

  • 300 mil inital cost
  • 1bil exporting taxes
  • ------------
  • 1,3 bil ISK total


profit is 5 bil (from sale) - 1,3 bil (cost) = 3,7 bil. BTW this calculation include new taxes, I had same profit before new taxes as after taxes, because simply market prices goes up factoring new taxes. So I don't cry river I just pointing it up. My profit would be same meay be better, because a lot people really quit PI as may be I would too.

setting up 45 PoCO would cost 9 bil, profit would be -5,3 bil

I can't produce PI with all 9 characters at same 5 planets because then planets goes dry in one week at all. Nobody from CCP really did realize that, even most rich planets in WH space can't support harvetsing by more than single person per 20 days. If I mention harvesting I do mean real intensive drilling with 1 day 45 minutes cycle to archieve cycle per harvester 15 minutes with 10 heads and 10 basic factories to reprocess all harvested materials to P1 in 24 hours cycle. Planet goes dry after 20 days and I'm unable to find any spot to feed up 10 factories afterall. When my resource production fall under 50k raw materials/hour I must abandon planet.

Resource regen is pure trues sec based so -1.0 planets have best resource regen and even these planets goes dry after 20 days. In 0.0 where average true sec are -0.4 is not possible even maintain setup with 10 factories and one harvester to keep these 10 factories up and running. If there would be POCO then that planet would be shared by more than 1 person and planet goes even dry sooner and is impossible to feed 10 factories with raw materials.

Planet with POCO and harvested by more than one person runing multiple sites would not produce enough resources to generate enough profit to justify time hastle with PI. Not to mention it is true pain to operate (setup via) clicking everything on planet. It was and still remains only poor man "job" in EVE.

To sum it up:


  • Nobody did count factor that planet has limited resource regens, so more people using planet mean less profit for everyone. Implied more people operating on harvest planet doesn't mean faster POCO investment return.
  • Only production planets having POCOs will pay up back POCO, but as I know one production planet need harvest P1 materials at least from 4 to 5 planets.


At end I have no problem with POCOs because I see that in my WH space these will not be replaced anytime soon. Anyway I stop my operations for now (abandoned all 45 planets) and sitting on my stockpile of P1 producst now worth around 20 bil and I'm sure it will be doubled may be trippled in next two weeks. Cheers CCP Omen, you really got back in old CCP track, we have always right. But customers vote with theirs legs, you should remember it.

I will see if POCOs will get replaced in WH space or not. If POCOs get replaced or Interbus COs will get destroyed I will stop doing PI. I will not resub 4 accounts and will have only remaining 2 active with 60 to 80 bil buffer to play with it. I wouldn't loose only who will loose will be CCP, even I do buy PLEXes these plexes still someone did buy for real money from CCP. I don't expect that people in WH-space would like to share theirs planets with me.

BTW DUST is just "hype", because who does play PS3 games would play it not more than few months. Good new game on PS3 come out to market every few months. As oposite EVE does exists since 2003 I never saw any kind of game on consoles to sold and be played so long. You shooting own legs with this aproach and changing maket focus on things called "hype".


We are very aware of where our paycheck come from. Making surgical incisions in EVE like the POCO is very stressful on us and we are closely monitoring the metrics how EVE is doing. It comes down to the fact that we feel the Customs Office was wrongly implemented to begin with and by redeeming that we will upset the customers that have gotten used to the old ways.

You may accuse us of many things, but not for not caring for EVE. She means everything to us and doing open heart surgery on her freaks us out! But we feel she won't survive without occasional course correction.

To your point with all the POCOs I would respond that you should only replace the InterBus POCO that is the bottleneck for your operation and centralize as much of your expensive operations there. This way, with only one or a few POCOs you can cut the overall cost of your network by a lot.

Cheers
Omen

Senior Game Designer Team True Grit EVE/DUST Gameplay Liaison

Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#675 - 2011-12-02 14:05:12 UTC
CCP Omen wrote:
What we also hope will happen is that cheap lowsec POCOs are used to assemble the most expensive parts and thereby spreading the risk between highsec and lowsec but that's just me speculating.

This could happen, but it will take a while, as industrialists will want some sort of guarantee the POCO won't dissapear after 2 days.

It also creates a dilemma for lowsec POCO operators. The planet has more resources than a highsec planet, so it's more valuable, so it doesn't make sense to make it much cheaper to extract stuff than it is in highsec. But to encourage high tier producers, you need a very low tax rate (and you can afford it because their base tax per colony is higher). Which one to choose?

If we could setup different tax rates for different tiers, it could be solved. At the cost of complicating the UI quite a lot.

What happens in lowsec, stays in lowsec, lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=476644&#post476644

Ruareve
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#676 - 2011-12-02 14:12:03 UTC
CCP Omen wrote:
Sarina Berghil wrote:
@ CCP Omen

I don't disagree that the old taxes were extremely small, and few people seemed to complain at double tax rates. This is probably proof that they were way too low.

But did you take into account how often goods are taxed? I wouldn't know the numbers myself, but I can imagine P4 goods get taxed quite a few times during their life cycle.

A 10-17% tax rate seems massive for something that might get double-dipped by taxes several times over.


We did take that into account but if we did it successfully, only time will tell. There is a 50% discount to import that is a little hard to spot so that helps a bit. Secondly, we have done some simulations in excel and there are some interesting opportunities to optimize your PI setup to minimize the amount of import/exports nececarry. We beleive you will figure this out and perhaps even enjoy doing it.

What we also hope will happen is that cheap lowsec POCOs are used to assemble the most expensive parts and thereby spreading the risk between highsec and lowsec but that's just me speculating.

Regards
Omen



First, I think the manufacture of the customs office and having them be a target is a good idea. However I think using tax increase to try and force people into low sec is a bad idea.

A moderate increase in tax making low sec more profitable for those that want to go: good.

An extreme increase in tax rendering high sec PI unprofitable: bad.


The benefits of low and null sec should be an option for those wishing to assume the risk, however in no way does that mean high sec should be punished for not participating in the other options. I doubt anyone would argue that high sec should be more profitable than low sec, but at the same time there needs to be some kind of profit to be had in high sec.

Consider the last quarterly numbers bulletin and the sheer volume of players in high sec. One of the reasons there are more people in high sec is because the average gamer prefers a safer environment. When you start making changes to force people out of high sec there is a very good chance that people who prefer safety will travel to a different game rather than try to play in security areas they don't like.

This change feels more like hiding the carrot and using the stick. Not a good way to keep players interested in a game.

Yet another blog about Eve- http://ruar-eve.blogspot.com/

Amy Elteam
No Bull Ships
#677 - 2011-12-02 14:14:26 UTC
All you people getting mad at CCP are disrespecting the larger number of players who spent a great deal of time analyzing the economics of the pi markets and pushed hard to get the taxation levels to match market values. It was a pleasant surprise to armchair economists like myself when ccp did exactly what we had been suggesting.

This does nothing to destroy pi as a viable way to make isk, all it does is annoy people who don't understand economics.
CCP Omen
C C P
C C P Alliance
#678 - 2011-12-02 14:15:07 UTC
Dario Kaelenter wrote:
CCP Omen wrote:
Before I try and meet your specific questions and concerns I just want to say that we are sorry for the inconvenience you experienced with the misleading patch notes and the lack of information regarding the tariff changes. There are no arguments against better information.

We are not the “old CCP” that try to trick you, I’d argue the opposite, the lack of proper and accurate information was brought because we changed the POCO feature three times based on player feedback. Did we take it too far this time? Some will argue that but we feel the feature is better prepared for the long run now.

Borrowing the comparison from Abramul and adding what I think is the missing component to such a comparison, the market price.

P0: 0.1 isk/unit -> 0.5 isk/unit -> 3.81 (Noble Metals at market)
P1: 0.76 isk/unit -> 50 isk/unit -> 475 (Electrolytes at market)
P2: 9 isk/unit -> 900 isk/unit -> 9.715 (Mechanical parts at market)
P3: 600 isk/unit -> 7000 isk/unit -> 70.011 (Robotics at market)
P4: 50000 isk/unit -> 135000 isk/unit -> 1.301.000 (Broadcast node at market)

The difference between the old tax and the market price is what we reacted to. Yes the relative tax change is monstrous but the actual tax change is more like “no tax” - > “tax”.

It is beyond any doubt that the amount of ISK you pay for doing PI has increased drastically, but our line is unchanged, that the previous costs had become invalid.

One of the mistakes we are absolutely guilty of is not noticing how low the taxes had become since launch of Tyrannis. This was pointed out to us at the very last moment by player feedback to the second dev blog here.

The Tyrannis taxes were set as a percentage of the NPC sell orders that was how planetary commodities used to enter the game pre Tyrannis. As Market prices rose, the tax base did not, effectively making it cheaper and more profitable by the day to do PI without risk. They keyword here is without risk. Players could effectively opt out of playing Internet Spaceship Game, and still make a fortune. We want players to make fortunes when there is risk, spaceships and politics involved.

I will continue to answer your questions in this thread.
Regards
CCP Omen



Per my previous post basing the tax on market values still seems like a good move going forward tho I think the heart of the problem is the rate picked/calculated as the Market Rate in setting the new taxes.

You unfortunately picked a point where prices had already been impacted on by the specter of this change and the PI Fuel Block change so had already reacted upwards a fair amount.

Prior to these announcements Robotics had settled down below 50K isk a unit and Broadcast node around 900 K so again I feel it would have been more diligent to have opted for a quarterly average market value to pick as the base for the tax.

Possibly also having the rate slowly increase to this new rate over the course of a week could have reduced the sudden shock factor !?


This is a good point that I will take up with the team. Technically it is not difficult to adjust the tariffs. I just want to re-iterate that if we adjust them, it will be to land at a more representative market value, not going back to pre Crucible levels.

Regards
Omen

Senior Game Designer Team True Grit EVE/DUST Gameplay Liaison

Gavjack Bunk
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#679 - 2011-12-02 14:16:43 UTC
I suppose we can look forward to you hammering the bastard living **** out of iskcur- sorry, incursions like you have with hisec PI ?

Or is my finger really not on the pulse of this game any more?
Nekopyat
Nee-Co
#680 - 2011-12-02 14:30:11 UTC
CCP Omen wrote:

The Tyrannis taxes were set as a percentage of the NPC sell orders that was how planetary commodities used to enter the game pre Tyrannis. As Market prices rose, the tax base did not, effectively making it cheaper and more profitable by the day to do PI without risk. They keyword here is without risk. Players could effectively opt out of playing Internet Spaceship Game, and still make a fortune. We want players to make fortunes when there is risk, spaceships and politics involved.


This cuts back to one of the long standing issues.. risk vs reward and the steep cutoff between high sec and low sec. I think if there were a more gradual path people would not be as unhappy with this, but for many players, esp solo ones or ones with older hardware, low sec isn't just risk, it is helplessness, and people do not like the feeling that they are not in control of their fate. This is why many people just don't go to low sec even when the carrots are increased,.. the jump in risk is so high that it negates the value. There just isn't enough middle ground.

For instance, I am a solo player. I have tried corporations, but because of my schedule and home-life I simply can not be reliable for group activities. Just not going to happen, so I am never going to have a 'gang' to go take some lowsec with.

I also have older hardware. There have been times where I jump or undock, and actually wake up in station before my screen has even loaded. Even when I can see what is going on, my UI generally does not respond very quickly. It is fine for NPCs since that is a slower activity, but players will generally insta-dead you.

Now, I am ok with taking additional risk for additional profit, but can not easily do this real time risk. In theory this means setting up things like POSes since that is a slower risk BUT here we again run into a steep cutoff problem. POSes are massive investments with high operating costs, there is little room for 'small risk, small reward, you HAVE to invest a major risk in order to do anything.

That is why I think it would have been nice if PI stuff, with its low costs, was attackable. 10-20M of PI I would be willing to risk because I can replace that. 200-400M of POS? Maybe pennies to some, but that is a huge thing for casual players. Even allowing the POCOs in high secs, wardecable, I think would have gone a long way here since a high sec acnorable structure to get that tax reduced (but still have the lower yield worlds) would be an excellent risk/reward tradeoff.

I am really hoping that the planned stuff for smaller in space structures goes though since that might help bridge this.