These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Citadels] Changing NPC taxes

First post
Author
Anhenka
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#541 - 2016-03-09 18:04:35 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Querns wrote:
Stuff


As mentioned there, we're open to 3 reprocessing bands.


+1 for this. As long as the Thukker array is exclusive to lowsec, the theoretical max refining rate should be higher in nullsec than in lowsec.

Solarus Explorer
United Caldari Navy
United Caldari Space Command.
#542 - 2016-03-09 18:05:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Solarus Explorer
Eve is a game where the market is completely player determined. Erecting barriers to market efficiency (trading taxes) is essentially discouraging players to trade in the market. I'm really not sure what the purpose of this is...... to hinder player interaction???

There is a difference between "player interaction", and a few players "controlling and enforcing their rules" on all other players. The meta-game where a few people decide how other players play does not need to be enforced on all areas. In low-sec and high-sec small groups and solo players could play however they wanted to, while still having access to a free and efficient market. Increasing trading taxes severely hinders market activity, and will cause bid-ask spreads to spike significantly, causing lesser trading activity on high-sec and low-sec areas, since sellers will have to increase their prices, and buyers will be more reluctant to buy at those higher prices. I really dont see who (in terms of playerbase) is winning here? This is promoting lesser market activity, lesser people buying/seeding markets and lesser pvp in low-sec as a result. Citadels in null-sec will anyways have market hubs to supply their players when they are deployed in the citadel. Null-sec groups dont need any further market incentive to introduce a market-hub module in their citadel, they will have it if they want their players to deploy there.

Additionally, trading cannot move to citadels in high-sec because of the "RL-Time" required to put up thousands of orders after a citadels is destroyed. This is the main reason that people will not do it. There are others that include uncertainty of tax changes, recovery cost/time etc, but the main reason is the time and effort required in having to move the assets and re-setup the market again (with other market participants).

As I see it, the tax increase is NOT going to serve the purpose of moving trading to citadels. It is however, going to reduce market activity and increase market spreads across the game, which is really bad for everyone imo (Economics 101 anyone?).

Really sad that this is going to go through :|
Khan Wrenth
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#543 - 2016-03-09 18:07:07 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
  • Cloning fee: decreased from 5m ISK to install or leave a clone behind to 900,000 ISK
  • 1/5th of a fail is still a fail. That's nothing to brag about. You could try making the jump clone system interesting, instead of shamelessly taxing people over it. That's a lazy solution to an imagined problem.
    Olga Zdenekieva
    WESH GROS CORP
    #544 - 2016-03-09 18:31:54 UTC
    Allow me to tax compression please
    Scotsman Howard
    S0utherN Comfort
    Test Alliance Please Ignore
    #545 - 2016-03-09 20:10:06 UTC
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Update on the original thread:


    • Transaction fee: increased from 1.5% to 2.5% in all NPC stations and player structures.
    • Brokers' fee: increased to 5% in NPC stations.
    • Broker's fee formula with skills and standings: currently with max skills and NPC standings you can reduce the brokers' fee by 0.7-0.8%. We will modify skills and standings to decrease the tax by 1.5% and also change them from being percentage based to a flat reduction.

    • So brokers' fee formula becomes: 5% brokers fee - ([Broker Relation skill level]0.2 + [Faction Standing level]0.03 + [Corp Standing level]*0.02)

      Minimum brokers' fee in NPC stations becomes 3.5% with skill and standings maxed. Please note there is no NPC brokers' fee in Citadels structures, but you'll have to deal with what the owner charges you. Skill won't work for player-set brokers' fee either.



    So will you be monitoring to see actually how many people move out of stations in high sec to citadels? Will we be getting updates after a certain amount of time as to how successful this idea was (other than raising prices across the board)?

    Just curious as we are still waiting on other updates on features such as the jump fatigue blog that was promised a while ago.

    Not trying to be salty here, but this is one change I honestly cannot support as it will only hurt the player base in the long run with higher prices.
    Tyranis Marcus
    Bloody Heathens
    #546 - 2016-03-09 20:19:57 UTC
    So we have pos's. These are being replaced by medium citadels.

    We have player outposts. These are being replaced by L and XL Citadels.

    Where in that is the burning need for Citadels to compete with npc stations in any way as far as public access and charging for services goes? You should really just leave npc stations the hell alone.

    I'll give you guys one thing, some of you are making steady progress toward your goal of destroying the game we've all spent years playing.

    Do not run. We are your friends.

    Dino Zavr
    Shadow Owls
    #547 - 2016-03-09 20:21:44 UTC
    Sorry to say, that is an emotional rant. That's probably because I still perceive Eve Online as more than just a bunch of pixels. Also I understand I may be wrong, but still this is what I think considering changes:


    The planned tax-per-clone-jump simply kills my freedom to have several roles for one character.

    After ~60kk SP it is possible to start training non-combat skills such as scanning or industry. As pilot has only one head, jump-cloning solves a problem of having different implants sets. Currently I have one clone with pvp implants: per+3 wil+3 cheap tracking and weapon damage implants, another is for mission running and two +4s, third contains blueprints research & copying implants and another clone is equipped with scanning hardwirings.
    Planned expenses for frequent swapping clones shall be really inconvenient. Of course, I understand your big idea: if you want to try something new – go and buy another account. One toon equals one role.
    But, hey, what about freedom to explore new professions and areas with a single toon?

    Actually, this is simply removing sand from a sandbox.

    Needless to say, hardening NPC station taxes is the attempt to eliminate small groups and solo play. I have no idea how instantly wardecced one man corps could afford and maintain their starbases. Big alliances are not skilled enough to compete with small corps for the market, so CCP kindly helps them to ruin solo and small corps industries. Newbs, go and press F1, trading and industry are for big guys only.

    This bring me to a conclusion:
    NPE is totally nerfed. Destroying EVElopedia is also a radical step to make new player life even harder. Now add to this newbie is to follow one strict path: only shoot things or only explore. The Science and Industry become restricted only to big entities due to taxation changes (as selling one's crafts and providing good ROI are really harder than just inventing and manufacturing things).

    Just because Developers want players to pay for switching roles, this leads to the obvious:

    Less sand in a sandbox, less players.


    And, no, you cannot have my stuff. I'll simply extract scanning, science and industry skills from my toon to inject them into another toons on my account and leave one medical clone with cheap +3s. But I feel extremely disappointing. Eve Online advertisements are about freedom and variety, but reality tends to be right the opposite: game makers enforcing a robust model of character development and turning New Eden into one big jail, controlled by the rich guys. That's really sad.

    Dear CCP Ytterbium,
    would you, please, reconsider. Real sandbox game is to support a variety of playstyles and player's roles. The direction you force Eve Online to is make players joining huge alliances and specialize in one single role. No room for solo play and experimenting for a little costs. Is this the right direction?
    Zappity
    Kurved Trading
    #548 - 2016-03-09 20:27:51 UTC
    I still strongly object to the jump clone fee. I'm thinking about younger players wanting to dip a toe into PvP.

    Aside from encouraging citadel use, what goal is this designed to result in? Less jump clone usage? Why? You are throwing the baby out with the bath water.

    Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.

    Frostys Virpio
    Caldari Provisions
    Caldari State
    #549 - 2016-03-09 20:32:54 UTC
    Dino Zavr wrote:
    Sorry to say, that is an emotional rant. That's probably because I still perceive Eve Online as more than just a bunch of pixels. Also I understand I may be wrong, but still this is what I think considering changes:


    The planned tax-per-clone-jump simply kills my freedom to have several roles for one character.

    After ~60kk SP it is possible to start training non-combat skills such as scanning or industry. As pilot has only one head, jump-cloning solves a problem of having different implants sets. Currently I have one clone with pvp implants: per+3 wil+3 cheap tracking and weapon damage implants, another is for mission running and two +4s, third contains blueprints research & copying implants and another clone is equipped with scanning hardwirings.
    Planned expenses for frequent swapping clones shall be really inconvenient. Of course, I understand your big idea: if you want to try something new – go and buy another account. One toon equals one role.
    But, hey, what about freedom to explore new professions and areas with a single toon?

    Actually, this is simply removing sand from a sandbox.

    Needless to say, hardening NPC station taxes is the attempt to eliminate small groups and solo play. I have no idea how instantly wardecced one man corps could afford and maintain their starbases. Big alliances are not skilled enough to compete with small corps for the market, so CCP kindly helps them to ruin solo and small corps industries. Newbs, go and press F1, trading and industry are for big guys only.

    This bring me to a conclusion:
    NPE is totally nerfed. Destroying EVElopedia is also a radical step to make new player life even harder. Now add to this newbie is to follow one strict path: only shoot things or only explore. The Science and Industry become restricted only to big entities due to taxation changes (as selling one's crafts and providing good ROI are really harder than just inventing and manufacturing things).

    Just because Developers want players to pay for switching roles, this leads to the obvious:

    Less sand in a sandbox, less players.


    And, no, you cannot have my stuff. I'll simply extract scanning, science and industry skills from my toon to inject them into another toons on my account and leave one medical clone with cheap +3s. But I feel extremely disappointing. Eve Online advertisements are about freedom and variety, but reality tends to be right the opposite: game makers enforcing a robust model of character development and turning New Eden into one big jail, controlled by the rich guys. That's really sad.

    Dear CCP Ytterbium,
    would you, please, reconsider. Real sandbox game is to support a variety of playstyles and player's roles. The direction you force Eve Online to is make players joining huge alliances and specialize in one single role. No room for solo play and experimenting for a little costs. Is this the right direction?


    At the 5mill / jump initially proposed, it would of taken over 240 jump to fund a single month of gametime to run an alt. This change does NOT push you toward training an alt AT ALL.

    With the new proposed cost, it's over 1200 jumps to fund a single moth worth of training on a supposedly required alt to do different activity. That's over 3 years of daily jumps cost just to cover the first moth of what you call a required alt for a second carrer path.

    I see exaggeration every day on this forum but DAMN this takes the cake. How many thousand jump worth of ISK will it cost you to train/buy that alt?
    Moac Tor
    Cyber Core
    Immediate Destruction
    #550 - 2016-03-09 20:53:50 UTC
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Querns wrote:
    Stuff

    As mentioned there, we're open to 3 reprocessing bands.

    Low sec is as difficult as doing industry in null sec, if not more so, and so I don't see any reason for 3 bands.
    Frostys Virpio
    Caldari Provisions
    Caldari State
    #551 - 2016-03-09 20:59:27 UTC
    Zappity wrote:
    I still strongly object to the jump clone fee. I'm thinking about younger players wanting to dip a toe into PvP.

    Aside from encouraging citadel use, what goal is this designed to result in? Less jump clone usage? Why? You are throwing the baby out with the bath water.


    How much ISK worth of implant does your "young player" has in his head that is at risk of being blownup causing him a major loss but would warrant creating a jump clone (5 million ) + jumping out of it (5M or new 1M proposal) for a grand total of 6 or 10 million ISK.
    Lugh Crow-Slave
    #552 - 2016-03-09 21:02:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Update on the original thread:


    • Transaction fee: increased from 1.5% to 2.5% in all NPC stations and player structures.
    • Brokers' fee: increased to 5% in NPC stations.
    • Broker's fee formula with skills and standings: currently with max skills and NPC standings you can reduce the brokers' fee by 0.7-0.8%. We will modify skills and standings to decrease the tax by 1.5% and also change them from being percentage based to a flat reduction.

    • So brokers' fee formula becomes: 5% brokers fee - ([Broker Relation skill level]0.2 + [Faction Standing level]0.03 + [Corp Standing level]*0.02)

      Minimum brokers' fee in NPC stations becomes 3.5% with skill and standings maxed. Please note there is no NPC brokers' fee in Citadels structures, but you'll have to deal with what the owner charges you. Skill won't work for player-set brokers' fee either.

    • Cloning fee: decreased from 5m ISK to install or leave a clone behind to 900,000 ISK
    • Reprocessing: changed how reprocessing rigs work to mirror more closely other structure rigs. Other structure rigs give you the same bonuses no matter the structure size, but you gain move coverage as you move up.

    • So for example a Medium Citadel Missile Rig will only give you an application bonus to structure single target missiles, while a X-Large Citadel Rig will give you a missile application and projection bonus not only to single target missiles but to the guided bombs as well.

      With that in mind, base reprocessing yield of the reprocessing service: 50% (also includes compression free of charge)
      All of the rigs below give the same bonuses: Tech I rigs will give 52% if the structure is in high-sec, 55% otherwise. Tech II rigs below will give 55% if the structure is in high-sec, 60% otherwise.

      Medium rigs (only apply to Astrahus):
    • Tech I and II rigs that applies for high-sec ores: Veldspar, Scordite, Pyroxeres, Omber, Kernite and all variants.
    • Tech I and II rigs that applies for all other ores: Arkonor, Bistot, Crokite, Dark Ochre, Gneiss, Mercoxit, Spodumain, Hedbergite, Hemorphite, Jaspet and all variants.
    • Tech I and II rigs that applies for: Clear Icicle, Enriched Clear Icicle, White Glaze, Pristine White Glaze, Dark Glitter and Gelidus
    • Tech I and II rigs that applies for: Blue Ice, Thick Blue Ice, Glacial Mass, Smooth Glacial Mass, Glare Crust, Krystallos.

    • Large rigs (only apply to Fortizar):
    • Tech I and II rigs that applies for all ores.
    • Tech I and II rigs that applies for all ices.

    • X-Large rig (only applies for Keepstar):
    • Tech I and II rigs that applies for all ore and ices.

    • And that should cover everything. Please keep in mind this is still WIP and subject to change based on constructive feedback.



    can we also please tax compression
    Moac Tor
    Cyber Core
    Immediate Destruction
    #553 - 2016-03-09 21:03:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Moac Tor
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    So brokers' fee formula becomes: 5% brokers fee - ([Broker Relation skill level]0.2 + [Faction Standing level]0.03 + [Corp Standing level]*0.02)

    This is too steep. Broker relations giving only a 20% reduction in fees and standings 10%, that is practically nothing. If you read back in this thread I have been supportive of the additional fees for marketing based under the current system of applying skills and standings. You've gone too far with this nerf though. I'd double the whole standing/skill part of the forumula as below:

    So 5% brokers fee - ([Broker Relation skill level] * 0.4 + [Faction Standing level] * 0.06 + [Corp Standing level] * 0.04)

    This still gives a total tax of ( 2% (broker fee) + 1.25% (transaction tax) = 3.25% (total) ) which is more than high enough.
    Albert Spear
    Non scholae sed vitae
    #554 - 2016-03-09 21:11:30 UTC
    CCP said:

    "Medium rigs (only apply to Astrahus):
    • Tech I and II rigs that applies for high-sec ores: Veldspar, Scordite, Pyroxeres, Omber, Kernite and all variants.
    • Tech I and II rigs that applies for all other ores: Arkonor, Bistot, Crokite, Dark Ochre, Gneiss, Mercoxit, Spodumain, Hedbergite, Hemorphite, Jaspet and all variants.
    • Tech I and II rigs that applies for: Clear Icicle, Enriched Clear Icicle, White Glaze, Pristine White Glaze, Dark Glitter and Gelidus
    • Tech I and II rigs that applies for: Blue Ice, Thick Blue Ice, Glacial Mass, Smooth Glacial Mass, Glare Crust, Krystallos."

    So for the only affordable Citadel for small corporations and solo players - Mediums - they have been further nerfed to make use by small hi-sec mining corporations even harder to do. The rig restrictions are just another nail in the coffin.

    I hope the POS'es stay around forever at this point, because that is the only way those of us who are casual evening players can play.

    Between the increase in fuel block cost, the changes in station fees, restrictions on medium citadel rigs and the rest of the changes, it feels like CCP would like people like me to leave the game.

    I was excited when the new structures were announced Big smile , now I am just short of outraged. Oops

    Please CCP think about the hurdles you are building for new players and the casual players who want to mine, chat and have social fun.
    Kaivar Lancer
    Doomheim
    #555 - 2016-03-09 21:12:10 UTC
    I guess that's it then, CCP will push this through. I've been playing this game since 2009. Kinda sucks to end it this way, but ah well. (I contemplated giving away my stuff, but it'd take a day to gather everything so I'm not going to bother).

    Adios, Eve.
    Dino Zavr
    Shadow Owls
    #556 - 2016-03-09 21:19:18 UTC
    Frostys Virpio wrote:
    Dino Zavr wrote:
    Sorry to say, that is an emotional rant.


    At the 5mill / jump initially proposed, it would of taken over 240 jump to fund a single month of gametime to run an alt. This change does NOT push you toward training an alt AT ALL.

    With the new proposed cost, it's over 1200 jumps to fund a single moth worth of training on a supposedly required alt to do different activity. That's over 3 years of daily jumps cost just to cover the first moth of what you call a required alt for a second carrer path.

    I see exaggeration every day on this forum but DAMN this takes the cake. How many thousand jump worth of ISK will it cost you to train/buy that alt?


    Sure, Frostys, an excellent point.

    And, yes, my rant is way more emotional than logical.

    Imagine barriers appearing out on nowhere. Friends call you to hangout with them and all of a sudden now you have to pay exit your house and to cross a street.

    Of course, carebearing brings me enough game currency not to complain. I just don't like the direction Eve evolves. Just like your your phone company and your ISP just significantly increase their prices. You can afford this but feel yourself deceived.
    New technological wonders are to be attractive. You definitely swap your wired telephone for a mobile one even mobiles were expensive at their very start. Because: freedom.

    Citadels do not beat NPCs stations, so some artificial measures are taken to force people to love them. How does this fit the concept of a sandbox?
    Frostys Virpio
    Caldari Provisions
    Caldari State
    #557 - 2016-03-09 21:25:51 UTC
    Dino Zavr wrote:
    Frostys Virpio wrote:
    Dino Zavr wrote:
    Sorry to say, that is an emotional rant.


    At the 5mill / jump initially proposed, it would of taken over 240 jump to fund a single month of gametime to run an alt. This change does NOT push you toward training an alt AT ALL.

    With the new proposed cost, it's over 1200 jumps to fund a single moth worth of training on a supposedly required alt to do different activity. That's over 3 years of daily jumps cost just to cover the first moth of what you call a required alt for a second carrer path.

    I see exaggeration every day on this forum but DAMN this takes the cake. How many thousand jump worth of ISK will it cost you to train/buy that alt?


    Sure, Frostys, an excellent point.

    And, yes, my rant is way more emotional than logical.

    Imagine barriers appearing out on nowhere. Friends call you to hangout with them and all of a sudden now you have to pay exit your house and to cross a street.

    Of course, carebearing brings me enough game currency not to complain. I just don't like the direction Eve evolves. Just like your your phone company and your ISP just significantly increase their prices. You can afford this but feel yourself deceived.
    New technological wonders are to be attractive. You definitely swap your wired telephone for a mobile one even mobiles were expensive at their very start. Because: freedom.

    Citadels do not beat NPCs stations, so some artificial measures are taken to force people to love them. How does this fit the concept of a sandbox?


    Because if they don't add cost to NPC station, there is no way to make citadels useful without breaking other things. Why would you put so much at risk by anchoring a citadel if you can do everything it does in a free station? POS had/have advantage over station but the service offered by citadels are not the same so we can't just let everything the same. If citadels are supposed to ever be attractive market places, the market there will need to be better to justify the risk for anyone. The current tax rate is SOOOOOO low right now there is virtually no margin for CCP to make the citadels hence why they are nerfing station instead of making citadels even better over that. You can't make the tax rate better than practically nothing so they made the practically nothing part bigger so there is a window for citadels better. Same for the clones and other services offered by citadels with a station equivalent.

    At some point, it has to go one way or another and you can't really make things better than so close to perfect so you go the other way.
    Rob Kaichin
    Aliastra
    Gallente Federation
    #558 - 2016-03-09 21:35:37 UTC
    Frostys Virpio wrote:
    Zappity wrote:
    I still strongly object to the jump clone fee. I'm thinking about younger players wanting to dip a toe into PvP.

    Aside from encouraging citadel use, what goal is this designed to result in? Less jump clone usage? Why? You are throwing the baby out with the bath water.


    How much ISK worth of implant does your "young player" has in his head that is at risk of being blownup causing him a major loss but would warrant creating a jump clone (5 million ) + jumping out of it (5M or new 1M proposal) for a grand total of 6 or 10 million ISK.


    Speaking from experience, my first two implants were +4s which were 20 million ISK each. Spending 1/4 of a +4 (which took a bloody long time to grind for, let me tell you) is totally untenable. And I was grinding in Low-sec too, where a battleship took ~10 minutes to kill!

    I'll put my objections to the rest of it in another post, but solo new players who try and take advantage of the availability of Jump clones to 'PvP' just won't spend that much to do it. They'll PvP in their +4 pod, they'll lose their hard won implants and they'll leave.

    How do I know? The multiple accounts I ran through with that story are still fresh in my memory.

    It's worth nothing the lack of objections from the Null bloc pilots to this change. We can't all be lucky enough to join alliances where we're showered with free stuff. The real Eve is one you find yourself, not one that's thrust upon you.
    Dino Zavr
    Shadow Owls
    #559 - 2016-03-09 21:35:41 UTC
    Frostys Virpio wrote:
    At some point, it has to go one way or another and you can't really make things better than so close to perfect so you go the other way.


    Yes. Not a plenty of options.
    But this still brings me to a question:
    I am a solo player and I simply don't want to become another bee in a hive. Also I hardly can purchase and maintain a Citadel in a wardecced one-man corp. Why shall I start paying extra for MY playstyle?
    Frostys Virpio
    Caldari Provisions
    Caldari State
    #560 - 2016-03-09 21:44:46 UTC
    Dino Zavr wrote:
    Frostys Virpio wrote:
    At some point, it has to go one way or another and you can't really make things better than so close to perfect so you go the other way.


    Yes. Not a plenty of options.
    But this still brings me to a question:
    I am a solo player and I simply don't want to become another bee in a hive. Also I hardly can purchase and maintain a Citadel in a wardecced one-man corp. Why shall I start paying extra for MY playstyle?


    Because the balance of the game needs it or a complete feature will be borderline useless. If they don't add a cost for everyone, nobody will try to go for the nonexistent benefit of the new option. It's like class of ship getting stepped on their toes because a new one is implemented. If new class were to not bring anything new to the table, they would not get used. Anything new they bring to the table implicitly mean something else is taking a hit because something counter it or does part of it's job better. There are no "better gap" anywhere for citadels so they had to move the other way around and nerf what was already at a too good level to create use case for the new stuff. If nothing should get nerfed because it's getting used right now, we might as well stop CCP from developing anything new ever and just keep a support crew to keep the game running because anything they implement will ALWAYS cause something else to be at least a bit less appreciated OR will be recognized as useless by the player base.