These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Dev blog: Building better Worlds

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1361 - 2014-04-19 21:56:15 UTC
Draconus Lofwyr wrote:
Querns wrote:
Draconus Lofwyr wrote:
tax reductions are corp standings.

Not completely -- market tax reductions benefit from both faction and corp. You want both as high as possible.



also not entirely, it draws from which ever is higher

Nope. According to https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Market_guide, the formula is as follows:

BrokerFee % = (1.000 % – 0.050 % × BrokerRelationsSkillLevel) / 2 ^ (0.1400 × FactionStanding + 0.06000 × CorporationStanding)

Faction standing is more than twice as valuable as corporation standing in driving your taxes down.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Draconus Lofwyr
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1362 - 2014-04-19 21:59:13 UTC
Querns wrote:
Draconus Lofwyr wrote:
Querns wrote:
Draconus Lofwyr wrote:
tax reductions are corp standings.

Not completely -- market tax reductions benefit from both faction and corp. You want both as high as possible.



also not entirely, it draws from which ever is higher

Nope. According to https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Market_guide, the formula is as follows:

BrokerFee % = (1.000 % – 0.050 % × BrokerRelationsSkillLevel) / 2 ^ (0.1400 × FactionStanding + 0.06000 × CorporationStanding)

Faction standing is more than twice as valuable as corporation standing in driving your taxes down.



ok, but still not required to reduce taxes to negligible. but its still a nerf to those that worked for the standings.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1363 - 2014-04-19 22:01:30 UTC
Draconus Lofwyr wrote:
but its still a nerf to those that worked for the standings.

You'll have to console yourself with the previous decade of uninterrupted highsec POS hegemony. I feel like you'll get over it.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1364 - 2014-04-19 23:57:33 UTC
UK is still imperial no matter what the EU say...except for science stuff then it's metric...confusing as hell for us when we were in school :D
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#1365 - 2014-04-20 00:54:54 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
UK is still imperial no matter what the EU say...except for science stuff then it's metric...confusing as hell for us when we were in school :D

Hehe, I love that 'except for science stuff'. Goodness knows what we'd end up creating by genetic engineering in Imperial! Probably the Amarr.

Metric is inevitable especially now that the SI units are being redefined according to physical constants.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Oraac Ensor
#1366 - 2014-04-20 02:28:27 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
UK is still imperial no matter what the EU say...except for science stuff then it's metric...confusing as hell for us when we were in school :D

The hell it is.

You been hibernating for 40 years?
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#1367 - 2014-04-20 04:19:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Steve Ronuken
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
UK is still imperial no matter what the EU say...except for science stuff then it's metric...confusing as hell for us when we were in school :D



Actually, no.

Most things are sold in Metric. They may be similar in size to the imperial measurements, but they're done in metric. So you won't buy a pound of jam. you'll buy 450 grams.

It's pretty much just: Milk, Beer and distance/speed on roads that's still done in Imperial. Everything else is metric.

Which is good, as imperial is a dumb system. The sooner it's entirely gone the better.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrication_in_the_United_Kingdom

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#1368 - 2014-04-20 04:26:24 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrication_in_the_United_Kingdomj

Erm.... drifting way off-topic.

And now, back to the dev blog...
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#1369 - 2014-04-20 05:19:42 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
I will probably never own a POS myself but I have to say that removing the standing requirement to anchor a POS in High Security is a very bad idea.

For as long as I've been playing this game, being able to place a POS in High Security is a badge of honor. If a change to the standing requirement is actually needed, (and it's not) then just allow the Corp members modified standing to be used in the Corp standing average. Opening up the rest of High Security to allow POS to be anchored is all fine and dandy but it needs to follow the original standing mechanic for anchoring, ie, same amount of corp standing as the system security level.

What I see happening here is an entire type of player run business being snuffed out of existence. This new change doesn't help the smaller corps and alliances that have worked hard at building up and maintaining Faction standings in order to have a POS in High Sec.

Opening up High Sec systems to anyone with no standing whatsoever to anchor a POS just means more moons for the big power-block Alliances to control.



DMC




Nothing stops me (or power blocs much much larger than me) from seeding every moon within 10j of jita with a large offline tower except my will to live


*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#1370 - 2014-04-20 05:27:04 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Theo Sotken wrote:
.

I am also concerned that being wardecced is already a pretty cheap afk way of griefing an industry corp and adds no risk to the wardeccer while causing a lot of disruption and expense. I would like a mechanic that introduces a long consequence for the wardeccers rather than the current pitifully low isk payment.




lol


Learn to shoot back,*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.
Theo Sotken
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1371 - 2014-04-20 08:26:44 UTC
Loraine Gess wrote:
Theo Sotken wrote:
.

I am also concerned that being wardecced is already a pretty cheap afk way of griefing an industry corp and adds no risk to the wardeccer while causing a lot of disruption and expense. I would like a mechanic that introduces a long consequence for the wardeccers rather than the current pitifully low isk payment.




lol


Learn to shoot back, you being terrible is not a reason to change game mechanics



And yet CCP seems to want to make industrialists more vulnerable and put more stuff at risk rather than tell pvpers be better?
and as for your advice 'Learn to shoot back' doesn't help the industry corp at all during the wardec period does it!
D'Kelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1372 - 2014-04-20 08:42:53 UTC
Loraine Gess wrote:
Theo Sotken wrote:
.

I am also concerned that being wardecced is already a pretty cheap afk way of griefing an industry corp and adds no risk to the wardeccer while causing a lot of disruption and expense. I would like a mechanic that introduces a long consequence for the wardeccers rather than the current pitifully low isk payment.




lol


Learn to shoot back, you being terrible is not a reason to change game mechanics


If you can shoot back 24 / 7 / 365 nice; do you have a family, work, eat and have a life? The rest of us have only an hour or so online as RL kicks in for the rest, CCP DO NOT consider when they make their changes, and that is the EFECTIVE game time players have at any one part of the day. More destructiveness is Possible in 2-3 Hrs by 4 - 6 players than can be countered by the same number of Constructive/productive players. That I believe is the imbalance that Theo is trying to put across.
Katrinna Voight-Kampf
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1373 - 2014-04-20 08:49:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Katrinna Voight-Kampf
Risk vs Reward in EvE industry, finally!!!

Of course themepark carebears don't like this changes, but what did you expect from them ?
D'Kelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1374 - 2014-04-20 09:27:05 UTC
Katrinna Voight-Kampf wrote:
Risk vs Reward in EvE industry, finally!!!

Of course themepark carebears don't like this changes, but what did you expect from them ?


Sigh! more poor quality trolling, now be a good baby troll and go back under your bridge. sorry the rest of you guys out there but this has to be a -9 score.
Red Bot Huntress
Quascri
#1375 - 2014-04-20 10:32:55 UTC
Katrinna Voight-Kampf wrote:
Risk vs Reward in EvE industry, finally!!!

Of course themepark carebears don't like this changes, but what did you expect from them ?

What Risk vs Reward? You haven't really read the whole devblog, have you.
Katrinna Voight-Kampf
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1376 - 2014-04-20 10:59:19 UTC
D'Kelle wrote:
Katrinna Voight-Kampf wrote:
Risk vs Reward in EvE industry, finally!!!

Of course themepark carebears don't like this changes, but what did you expect from them ?


Sigh! more poor quality trolling, now be a good baby troll and go back under your bridge. sorry the rest of you guys out there but this has to be a -9 score.


Prime exemple of a themepark carebear thought process, everyone that don't agree with them are trolls.
Katrinna Voight-Kampf
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1377 - 2014-04-20 11:01:14 UTC
Red Bot Huntress wrote:
Katrinna Voight-Kampf wrote:
Risk vs Reward in EvE industry, finally!!!

Of course themepark carebears don't like this changes, but what did you expect from them ?

What Risk vs Reward? You haven't really read the whole devblog, have you.


Set of principles:

Any industry feature must have an actual gameplay attached to it in order to exist
Any industry feature must be balanced around our risk versus reward philosophy
Any industry feature must be easily understandable and visible to our player base
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1378 - 2014-04-20 12:27:09 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
UK is still imperial no matter what the EU say...except for science stuff then it's metric...confusing as hell for us when we were in school :D



Most things are sold in Metric. They may be similar in size to the imperial measurements, but they're done in metric. So you won't buy a pound of jam. you'll buy 450 grams.

It's pretty much just: Milk, Beer and distance/speed on roads that's still done in Imperial. Everything else is metric.



Actually if you get decent jam here it's sold in 454 gram pots...guess what that converts to in imperial :D

We define ourselves physicslly in imperial as in feet and inches, stone, pounds, and ounces. Distance and area are in miles, most here haven't a concept of how far a kilometre is but tell us it is just over half a mile and we know its a 10 minute walk or so. I was born 2 years after decimalization here so grew up using both methods. Someone said this is off topic but it actually shows exactly the same thinking.

Those happy with the old way will want to stay with it, those caught in the change will either adapt or wish things had never changed. Those that start after the change will look at the old way of doing things and think 'But that's nuts!'

just because those who are used to the old ways of things aren't happy doesn't mean that the change isn't required or indeed necessary.
Vesago
Doomheim
#1379 - 2014-04-20 15:57:24 UTC
D'Kelle wrote:
Loraine Gess wrote:
Theo Sotken wrote:
.

I am also concerned that being wardecced is already a pretty cheap afk way of griefing an industry corp and adds no risk to the wardeccer while causing a lot of disruption and expense. I would like a mechanic that introduces a long consequence for the wardeccers rather than the current pitifully low isk payment.




lol


Learn to shoot back, you being terrible is not a reason to change game mechanics


If you can shoot back 24 / 7 / 365 nice; do you have a family, work, eat and have a life? The rest of us have only an hour or so online as RL kicks in for the rest, CCP DO NOT consider when they make their changes, and that is the EFECTIVE game time players have at any one part of the day. More destructiveness is Possible in 2-3 Hrs by 4 - 6 players than can be countered by the same number of Constructive/productive players. That I believe is the imbalance that Theo is trying to put across.



This is so true, PvP takes zero commitment in regards to high sec war dec's. They are looking for easy targets. You can run a PvP fleet at your leisure, while maintaining an Industrial effort requires time, and ships that arent capable of defending themselves. A high Sec war dec means my Freighters stay parked. But the PvP corp has nothing but benefit from it. For there to be risk vs. rewards for all parties, There should be a mechanic that makes shooting industrials risky in some way. That will of course... never happen.
Freelancer117
So you want to be a Hero
#1380 - 2014-04-20 16:46:18 UTC
Freelancer117 wrote:

A) Could you explain please what the philosophy / lore behind this is when no more faction standing requirements are needed ?

It seems reasonable for all those engineers out there, to see their hard work grinding faction standing to pick the fruits of that.
This way it just copies losec, please consider faction standing to be involved when it concerns Starbase Charters requirements for hisec.

B) And the obvious question has to be asked ofc, will the industry changes be tied into CREST ?


B ) was answered by CCP Nullarbor (source: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4474947#post4474947);

"We will at the very least be updating the static export with new blueprint data, and I'll try and get this out to devs before the release."

A) is answered by CSM 8 vice-chairman Ripard Teg ;

"And here's the simple fact of the matter: guys, they do understand this. Hell, they haven't said so -- if they had, it would be NDA -- but I suspect that's the goal of the exercise.
CCP Greyscale (source: http://jestertrek.blogspot.nl/2014/04/traitor.html)
in particular has for years been the champion of the philosophy that doing some activities in some areas of space should completely suck and you would be dumb to do those activities there. In the past, the goal has been to make living full-time in null-sec directly correlate with higher player income than living in high-sec. I can easily see industry warping off in that direction come summer.


Eve online is :

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

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

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

http://bit.ly/1egr4mF