Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

It is mean to make it so that citadels are competitive in comparison to NPC stations.

The OP was talking bovine excrement in this case. A clone bay has the fuel cost that CCP sets for it, not more, not less. If CCP sets the fuel costs for a clone bay in a citadel to zero, then it costs absolutely nothing to run. There is no necessary number there at all, just a "CCP wants that" number.

I see no particular reason why the electricity needed by a cloning bay should not be marginal and simply included in the general running costs. Existing transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) devices consume about 2-3 kW at full blast. That's like installing fifty extra 60W lightbulbs in your citadel. Fridges / freezers for the bodies are fairly cheap to run as well, a normal deep freezer is perhaps 500W. Say your human-size, fancy one is a few kW, so what? All this certainly pales into complete insignificance against crunching rocks for minerals or shooting lasers that melt spaceships at immense distances or the like...

What I didn't see you address is the Citadels that are distractible, and the player has ZERO control over access, and fees. So you won't *lose* anything, only everything for 20 days when they are killed.

So what does a player do when the crop that owns the Citadel changes the fees and standings without any notice? I guess we just loose everything? No one has addressed this concern.

This is a very bad idea, at least for highsec markets. When considering tax increases, it is not the base change that needs to be considered, but rather, the percentage of change. Increasing transaction tax from 1.5% to 2.5% is an increase of 67%. Increasing brokers fees from 1% to 5-6% is an increase of 400-500%. Even considering reductions from skills, the market will not easily sustain these increases which amount to a massive isk sink. Simple economic theory says that you will see significantly less trading of goods as a result, with wider gaps between buy/sell orders. 'Quick-selling' will become even less attractive with the price difference merely falling into the isk sink. Prices of goods will increase by an amount similar to the tax margins (will not be split 50-50 between buyer and seller as margins are generally not strong enough in EvE to support that). Additionally, it places a SP burden - newer players can compete on the market without training market skills due to the low overall taxes. With higher SP players able to avoid significant percentages of a larger tax, the gap widens and these market skills will become like the Learning skills of old - a 'must train' in order to avoid crushing taxation on wallet growth over time.

The question is the reasoning CCP has behind this isk sink - is there a feeling that there is too much ISK in play? Will isk faucets be increasing to account for the new sink? I understand that the plan is to forcibly drive players away from stations and towards citadels. However, this will be a difficult iterative process for successful implementation. In the meantime, broader consequences must be considered.



Now, if you really want to shake things up, make stations destructible with the same asset movement system as citadels.

I think a better idea may be removing some NPC stations from high and low sec rather than just making them ore expensive that way there becomes a need for them in areas rather than people feeling like they always have to use them

the problem is npc stations are to plentiful and to strong they did need to be nerffed

what are you talking about i have a private titan and plenty of smaller ls groups have suppers.

and yes small groups will be able to have these just not in prime locations

but these things never used to be free just cheaper

There are some that will like the new changes ( and will argue till blue in the face how great it will be) and some that don't (Unsubbed because what's the point in arguing) . Those that don't here is what I have experienced.

The corp I was in the player base was/is shrinking because too many were not liking the new changes with no rewarding content. Every corp member is different and enjoyed different aspects of the game. From recent ship changes, jump fatigue, sov mechanics just to name the recent few have drove them away. Some felt more satisfied to play a less expensive game that provided a more overall satisfaction then redundant and tedious gameplay that provides less and less rewards.

I Think citadels are a great idea but shouldn't be FORCED upon players. The Citadel idea should sell itself and not making other parts of the game play crap to compensate. Just make citadels that much better then what NPC has to offer by coming up with new ideas that NPC stations cant offer. Some positive ideas have been thrown out with cloning. I am sure there are some more great a new ideas that citadels can achieve.


Ultimately CCP will do what it wants I just hope they realize the full scope of this change.

Well, the use of negative reinforcement in an attempt to change player behaviour ( The stick) has been pointed out as a real mistake as clearly as possible. I would have thought CCP would have learnt that this does not get the results one would have hoped for by now.

The use of positive reinforcement to encourage people to move to citadels (the carrot) has like wise been highlighted as a superior method for a game, the one we play and the one that CCP's owners and staff rightfully benefit from.

They now need to make the decision, they will either dodge a bullet, and the citadel expansion will be popular and be a much loved roadmap component for the future.

Or they will take one to the face, wonder why it failed so miserably, and put the roadmap back by a year, and player trust back quite a way, and make the dream of subscription growth a somewhat hollow goal.

So CCP which will it be? And do you really want to turn potential success into something you are going to spend a year trying to recover from?

Nothing left to say. Your Actions will speak louder than words.
After all, It is your game, and you are responsible for your decisions, whatever they lead to.