These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Control of high-sec station trading rules and broker
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dream Five
Renegade Pleasure Androids
#1 - 2014-09-23 13:21:49 UTC
Here's an idea - provide some means of giving players high-sec station influence, so that they could control some attributes in stations. This could include the broker fee, tax, as well as other trading rules such as order expiration and modification time, max orders per trader etc. This could allow player-controlled rules to be setup to make trading more fair for newer players. CCP could still have their 0.75% + base broker, everything else would be extra.

So huge alliances would start massive battles for Jita 4-4 and in general I think the trading market might get dispersed.

Seems like this could be fun.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#2 - 2014-09-23 13:26:03 UTC
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#3 - 2014-09-23 13:42:53 UTC
My first impulse was to disagree, but then I got to thinking about it. If alliances could influence station attributes, there would have to be a mechanism to choose which alliance was the one exerting the influence. Choosing means competition, and competition means content.

I like it. It's kind of like POCOs, but obviously wouldn't involve destroying stations and building your own.

Having said that, the amount of influence exertable would have to be just right. Too little influence and nobody would bother competing for it, but too much and markets would start crashing.

+1 with some reservations. I'd like to see where this one goes.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#4 - 2014-09-23 14:27:50 UTC
Player owned stations with tax and docking rights sure.

but not every station should be player controllable. Least of all jita 4-4.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#5 - 2014-09-23 16:43:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Maldiro Selkurk
Null cartels own the blue donut and you want to give them the middle also, despite what a mess they made of the donut....great idea!

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
Celthric Kanerian
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#6 - 2014-09-23 19:27:02 UTC
What the f? No.

Think about the ships caught in the crossfire if done in for example, Jita 4-4.
Also no because I only pay taxes on my lvl 4 missions to my corp, don't need more taxes.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#7 - 2014-09-23 19:28:54 UTC
I'm going to agree with Maldiro here. Nullsec having ownership of highsec as well can result in only two things:

Ridiculous policy designed specifically to mess with, troll and otherwise bother highsec-dwellers with the general intent of making them quit EVE entirely

followed by

More god-awful treaties, nips and naps and the blue donut turning into a blue cookie at which point EVE -will- die.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#8 - 2014-09-24 01:09:21 UTC
Dream Five wrote:
This could allow player-controlled rules to be setup to make trading more fair for newer players.

Seems like this could be fun.



This will just make trading more in favor of large alliances and hell for the new player. either that or goons get bored and decide that the broker fee in jita is 100% and max orders is one.

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#9 - 2014-09-24 02:18:33 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Dream Five wrote:
This could allow player-controlled rules to be setup to make trading more fair for newer players.

Seems like this could be fun.



This will just make trading more in favor of large alliances and hell for the new player. either that or goons get bored and decide that the broker fee in jita is 100% and max orders is one.

Something even remotely close to being that extreme would never work. At most it could be, say, a 5% levy on transactions. Certainly no interference with any other trade mechanics like order limit, range, etc.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Lugh Crow-Slave
#10 - 2014-09-24 02:31:05 UTC
Bronson Hughes wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Dream Five wrote:
This could allow player-controlled rules to be setup to make trading more fair for newer players.

Seems like this could be fun.



This will just make trading more in favor of large alliances and hell for the new player. either that or goons get bored and decide that the broker fee in jita is 100% and max orders is one.

Something even remotely close to being that extreme would never work. At most it could be, say, a 5% levy on transactions. Certainly no interference with any other trade mechanics like order limit, range, etc.


if it was only 5% they would all just be set to 5%

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Dream Five
Renegade Pleasure Androids
#11 - 2014-09-24 03:05:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Dream Five
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Dream Five wrote:
This could allow player-controlled rules to be setup to make trading more fair for newer players.

Seems like this could be fun.



This will just make trading more in favor of large alliances and hell for the new player. either that or goons get bored and decide that the broker fee in jita is 100% and max orders is one.


You are forgetting that people will be competing for these, so the forces of market competition should create some downward pressure on charges. BTW tax and broker could be all the way down to base 0.75, 0.5 with CCP taking some percentage of the player set broker/tax.

Besides if you set it to 100 nobody will want to use your station. Controlling all of stations in highsec would be presumably impossible. Even controlling all stations in Jita system could be made difficult enough.

But yeah i agree with Bronson, this should be limited to at most 5% probably to avoid potential fail cascade.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#12 - 2014-09-24 03:09:33 UTC
Dream Five wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Dream Five wrote:
This could allow player-controlled rules to be setup to make trading more fair for newer players.

Seems like this could be fun.



This will just make trading more in favor of large alliances and hell for the new player. either that or goons get bored and decide that the broker fee in jita is 100% and max orders is one.


You are forgetting that people will be competing for these, so the forces of market competition should create some downward pressure on charges. BTW tax and broker could be all the way down to base 0.75, 0.5 with CCP taking some percentage of the player set broker/tax.

Besides if you set it to 100 nobody will want to use your station. Controlling all of stations in highsec would be presumably impossible. Even controlling all stations in Jita system could be made difficult enough.



you don't need to control them all you just need to control jita 4-4 for a day

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Dream Five
Renegade Pleasure Androids
#13 - 2014-09-24 03:12:19 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Dream Five wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Dream Five wrote:
This could allow player-controlled rules to be setup to make trading more fair for newer players.

Seems like this could be fun.



This will just make trading more in favor of large alliances and hell for the new player. either that or goons get bored and decide that the broker fee in jita is 100% and max orders is one.


You are forgetting that people will be competing for these, so the forces of market competition should create some downward pressure on charges. BTW tax and broker could be all the way down to base 0.75, 0.5 with CCP taking some percentage of the player set broker/tax.

Besides if you set it to 100 nobody will want to use your station. Controlling all of stations in highsec would be presumably impossible. Even controlling all stations in Jita system could be made difficult enough.



you don't need to control them all you just need to control jita 4-4 for a day


At 5% some people will just keep going to Jita, others will move their stuff to Jita 4-5 or something.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#14 - 2014-09-24 03:13:59 UTC
Dream Five wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Dream Five wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Dream Five wrote:
This could allow player-controlled rules to be setup to make trading more fair for newer players.

Seems like this could be fun.



This will just make trading more in favor of large alliances and hell for the new player. either that or goons get bored and decide that the broker fee in jita is 100% and max orders is one.


You are forgetting that people will be competing for these, so the forces of market competition should create some downward pressure on charges. BTW tax and broker could be all the way down to base 0.75, 0.5 with CCP taking some percentage of the player set broker/tax.

Besides if you set it to 100 nobody will want to use your station. Controlling all of stations in highsec would be presumably impossible. Even controlling all stations in Jita system could be made difficult enough.



you don't need to control them all you just need to control jita 4-4 for a day


At 5% some people will just keep going to Jita, others will move their stuff to Jita 4-5 or something.


as i said b4 if the max you can put on it is 5% odds are it will end up being 5% all around

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Dream Five
Renegade Pleasure Androids
#15 - 2014-09-24 03:23:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Dream Five
Quote:
At 5% some people will just keep going to Jita, others will move their stuff to Jita 4-5 or something.


Quote:
as i said b4 if the max you can put on it is 5% odds are it will end up being 5% all around



OK. Imagine 1-2% is at stake MAX. (that's still super huge for Jita)

Now goons would have to fight for a station 24/7 and risk 1000s of ships. That's not an obvious decision to make.

The objectives for station control could be dispersed too so there are no blobs. This could be pitched as hacking into arket communication network routers for instance.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#16 - 2014-09-24 03:25:50 UTC
Dream Five wrote:
Quote:
At 5% some people will just keep going to Jita, others will move their stuff to Jita 4-5 or something.


Quote:
as i said b4 if the max you can put on it is 5% odds are it will end up being 5% all around



OK. Imagine 1-2% is at stake MAX. (that's still super huge for Jita)

Now goons would have to fight for a station 24/7 and risk 1000s of ships. That's not an obvious decision to make.




So now i have to deal with even more TiDi? no thanks

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#17 - 2014-09-24 04:00:00 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
Dream Five wrote:
Quote:
At 5% some people will just keep going to Jita, others will move their stuff to Jita 4-5 or something.


Quote:
as i said b4 if the max you can put on it is 5% odds are it will end up being 5% all around



OK. Imagine 1-2% is at stake MAX. (that's still super huge for Jita)

Now goons would have to fight for a station 24/7 and risk 1000s of ships. That's not an obvious decision to make.

Given that you are talking about hundreds of billions of ISK worth of stuff (or TRILLIONS in the case of Jita) being passed around each market hub each day... no... it's completely obvious why large alliances would want to control as many major trade hubs as possible and why they, and their allies, would commit forces to each new trade hub that pops up. You are effectively talking about creating a passively operating gold mine.

Dream Five wrote:
The objectives for station control could be dispersed too so there are no blobs. This could be pitched as hacking into arket communication network routers for instance.

How can you possibly "break up the blob" without hindering small groups of players or trampling over some the most dear mechanics of EVE (ex. no instancing, no arbitrary "fairness" rules, etc)?

Mechanically a small group and large group are the same thing. And if you try to create a difference then the big group just splits itself into smaller "unaffiliated" groups to gain the same advantages while maintaining its numerical superiority.


And your hacking solution just gives a greater advantage to "the blob." You bring one person to hack them? They will bring 100.

How did you Veterans start?
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#18 - 2014-09-24 06:00:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Give players these tools for 00 Sec. That's where players are supposed to do these things. High sec and Low sec NPC stations are not supposed to be under such a player control as they are Empire owned assets, not Player owned assets. Furthermore, it would move activity out of areas, which are currently already devoid of it and that's the least the game needs.

The sheer and prodigious potential for abuse of such a mechanic does not even need to be mentioned.

-1

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Samillian
Angry Mustellid
#19 - 2014-09-24 07:58:25 UTC
Dream Five wrote:
Controlling all of stations in highsec would be presumably impossible.


You don't need to control all the stations in HiSec just the ones with good positions and viable markets.

Give a large and well resourced group of EvE players this sort of opportunity and they will exploit its potential well beyond anything a Dev would anticipate.

NBSI shall be the whole of the Law
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#20 - 2014-09-24 14:27:30 UTC
No, just no. Wrong/bad idea in every way possible.

Your ideas would reward the corps/alliances that have the military power to take what they want at the expense of the smaller corps/alliances and the new players. If you want to use you military might to control something that is what low and nul are all about, go forth and have fun.

Besides there are 2 game mechanics that allow you to control the amount of tax you pay, the reprocessing/refining yields and several other key factors they are called "skills" and "standing". Higher skills/standing = lower tax, higher yields etc. So go forth train those skills and grind that standing to achieve your goals instead of asking CCP to give the big guys just one more way they can trample the little guys out of the game.

A somewhat related comment. Players taking advantage of what CCP has done/not done has made a total mess out of nul, I wonder why so many players are keen on creating the same ugly set of game circumstances here in high sec?
For all of it's problems high sec is currently the only really active and viable region of space, sure there are many small groups active in nul but they are an insignificant presence and in my time in this game the vast majority of low sec sits unoccupied most of the time. It would seem to me that what needs changing in this game is low and nul not high.
12Next page