These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Zappity
Exit-Strategy
Unchained Alliance
#581 - 2016-03-09 22:51:32 UTC
I really like the market tax idea btw. I think it should be a bit higher tbh.

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

Moac Tor
Cyber Core
Immediate Destruction
#582 - 2016-03-09 22:55:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Moac Tor
baltec1 wrote:
Looking at all of these comments it seems the tax is going to have the desired effect.

For sure. With a tax this high you can say goodbye to Jita 4-4. NPC trading just won't be competitive with the NPC taking an almost 5% cut of every trade order. Once a solid alliance gets a hub setup they can trade there with taxes as low as 1.25%.

I think citadels should have an advantage but I think this is too much. NPC stations shouldn't become completely unviable.

(also if said alliance can set taxes based upon specific groups then they can effectively lock down an entire regional market - this is hypothetical at the moment although would be the logical next step)
Rob Kaichin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#583 - 2016-03-09 22:59:47 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Looking at all of these comments it seems the tax is going to have the desired effect.



Which is what?
Zappity
Exit-Strategy
Unchained Alliance
#584 - 2016-03-09 23:05:29 UTC
Rob Kaichin wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Looking at all of these comments it seems the tax is going to have the desired effect.



Which is what?

Push people towards trading in citadels instead of NPC stations. Good stuff.

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

Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp
Goonswarm Federation
#585 - 2016-03-09 23:10:59 UTC
Have followed the thread closely - and believe I do understand the feelings expressed.

I thought the JC cost too high - and think that has now been addressed.

I too will feel the Tax increases - but, in the end, if 'safety' is wanted then it has to be paid for. Will this be a shock, yes, but perhaps a good one.

Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium

Niko Zino
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#586 - 2016-03-09 23:16:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Niko Zino
As an aside, I'm flabbergasted that most of the people advocating against the change tend to say variations on the "it doesn't affect me much personnally, but here's a list of people and mechanics it will upset", while most people in favor of the change tend to say "it doesn't affect me much so it can't be that bad". I have yet to see someone pointing at anything that can be construed as positive for the game as a whole. I just can't see that being a good sign.

As for the jump clone tax, as many people said, it's not as much an amount issue as it is a psychological one. Yes, of course, CAS will have a fund ro pay for the newbros' vacation time in null. But a fund has to be managed and policed. More work, for the same amount of positive results on the NPE. We'll manage, we have managed to stay in business for 8 years, resisting every and all restrictions, taxes, and quite frankly scorn, to make sure there is someone willing to take a 1min old player and show them they don't have only being a miner or joining a big corporation as their choices. Upholding the idea of a sandbox game where choices are your own, and the right one isn't dependant on other people's opinions.

I still think imposing any kind of barrier for people who, old or new, don't know that they can try whatever they want, whenever they want, if only for a day, is a mistake, in the long run. JC cooldown reduction for citadel bays seems much more viable, as it shortens the time between wanting something and actually trying that something, win or loose. Fluidifying the game, rather than stratifying it. Some other ideas like implant insurance etc are also really good ideas, as they are clear positives for people who will know how to take advantage of them, rather than punishing the players who don't know about the mechanics.

CAS, the NPC Corp that Does Stuff™

Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#587 - 2016-03-09 23:20:34 UTC
Estella Osoka wrote:
If the idea is to get people to use Citadel Clone Vats, then putting a tax on NPC JCs is not the answer. The best way to get people to use the Citadel clone vats would be to give the Citadels the ability to reduce the JC timer.

If you really want an isk sink, make it so you can pay a fee to reduce the jump clone cooldown timer.


That's just a raw power projection buff....
Niko Zino
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#588 - 2016-03-09 23:24:31 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Estella Osoka wrote:
If the idea is to get people to use Citadel Clone Vats, then putting a tax on NPC JCs is not the answer. The best way to get people to use the Citadel clone vats would be to give the Citadels the ability to reduce the JC timer.

If you really want an isk sink, make it so you can pay a fee to reduce the jump clone cooldown timer.


That's just a raw power projection buff....


Only if you have citadels at both ends of your projection. Which could be hard to do in hostile space, expensive to maintain if it's a wide network, etc etc etc

CAS, the NPC Corp that Does Stuff™

Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#589 - 2016-03-09 23:25:39 UTC
Niko Zino wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Estella Osoka wrote:
If the idea is to get people to use Citadel Clone Vats, then putting a tax on NPC JCs is not the answer. The best way to get people to use the Citadel clone vats would be to give the Citadels the ability to reduce the JC timer.

If you really want an isk sink, make it so you can pay a fee to reduce the jump clone cooldown timer.


That's just a raw power projection buff....


Only if you have citadels at both ends of your projection. Which could be hard to do in hostile space, expensive to maintain if it's a wide network, etc etc etc


What if I hold SOV over a few Region and can defend this SOV by using a network of rapid jump clone?
Niko Zino
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#590 - 2016-03-09 23:30:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Niko Zino
Frostys Virpio wrote:

What if I hold SOV over a few Region and can defend this SOV by using a network of rapid jump clone?


How is that different from using jump bridges? If you have the ISK and the organizational wizardry, good for you!
You could also have alts stationed everywhere, too. With the skill injectors, it's only a matter of having deep pockets (just like citadels), to have pilots in the right place, after all...

Or you can pay 5mil * your 1000 pilots too. As stated, as long as you have enough funds, you have no issue.

Now take the smaller group that goes after your sov. They can't afford any of these solutions, not realistically, on top of their expected ship losses. So they won't even try. Less fights, market or pvp wise. Congratulations to the top dogs, they win eve and can rat all day, since there is no opposition. Is that a desirable outcome?

Or do you want me to continue whelping my fleet on yours while everyone involved STILL has fun, win or loose?

CAS, the NPC Corp that Does Stuff™

Aaron Honk
Distributed Denial of Service
#591 - 2016-03-09 23:31:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Aaron Honk
.
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#592 - 2016-03-09 23:32:07 UTC
Niko Zino wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:

What if I hold SOV over a few Region and can defend this SOV by using a network of rapid jump clone?


How is that different from using jump bridges? If you have the ISK and the organizational wizardry, good for you!
You could also have alts stationed everywhere, too. With the skill injectors, if only a matter of having deep pockets (just like citadels) after all...


It's super different because jump bridge can only give you 5 LY per jump and you get fatigue every jump and have to wait before you continue.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#593 - 2016-03-09 23:33:49 UTC
Excellion wrote:
On the other hand nullsec alliances can just produce whatever they need and be completely unaffected.



lol wut do you have any idea how much importing goes on from jita to nul
Circumstantial Evidence
#594 - 2016-03-09 23:39:14 UTC
CCP Ytterbium on 2016-02-11 wrote:
...we're probably going to increase market NPC taxes to make Citadel more attractive at some point.
I wish this was planned for "some point" after Citadels were released, they have many interesting carrots promoting their use, I'd like to see time allowed to work out issues and let you evaluate usage for at least a month following the Citadels expansion, before applying these sticks.
Niko Zino
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#595 - 2016-03-09 23:44:41 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
It's super different because jump bridge can only give you 5 LY per jump and you get fatigue every jump and have to wait before you continue.


Yes yes, of course, I wasn't trying to be cute, just outline the fact that, like most organizational issues both IRL and in Eve, you can hide most flaws under the money carpet. It's when you don't have the carpetbombing solution that finding creative solutions to any given problem is both fun and rewarding. Kinda like when you rekt an officer fit nightmare with a handful of t1 ships, or when you find a way to manufacture your goods on the cheap to undercut the market barons. THAT is the gameplay I'd like to promote, but I realize I may be in the minority.

CAS, the NPC Corp that Does Stuff™

Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#596 - 2016-03-09 23:50:22 UTC
Niko Zino wrote:
[quote=Frostys Virpio]

Now take the smaller group that goes after your sov. They can't afford any of these solutions, not realistically, on top of their expected ship losses. So they won't even try. Less fights, market or pvp wise. Congratulations to the top dogs, they win eve and can rat all day, since there is no opposition. Is that a desirable outcome?


So you won't be able to contest SOV because you have to pay up to 6 mill per jump cone? That is the reason why you would stop going in fleet taking on large SOV owner. For a 6 mill jump clone fee per pilot?
Lugh Crow-Slave
#597 - 2016-03-09 23:57:28 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Niko Zino wrote:
[quote=Frostys Virpio]

Now take the smaller group that goes after your sov. They can't afford any of these solutions, not realistically, on top of their expected ship losses. So they won't even try. Less fights, market or pvp wise. Congratulations to the top dogs, they win eve and can rat all day, since there is no opposition. Is that a desirable outcome?


So you won't be able to contest SOV because you have to pay up to 6 mill per jump cone? That is the reason why you would stop going in fleet taking on large SOV owner. For a 6 mill jump clone fee per pilot?

Look its... its just so much it would take me almost 1/2 a site to make that much
Niko Zino
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#598 - 2016-03-10 00:01:29 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
So you won't be able to contest SOV because you have to pay up to 6 mill per jump cone? That is the reason why you would stop going in fleet taking on large SOV owner. For a 6 mill jump clone fee per pilot?


No, SOV can't be held by CAS anyways ;)

Stupid repartee aside, since most sov stuff looks from the outside to be hugely affected by the number of pilots you can field, you are looking at a choice between risking to deploy a citadel that costs 7B (I assume the deployment procedure is dangerous, in hostile space, but I may be wrong), or paying X mil for all of your pilots who will be stuck there, and who, if they want to rat for a couple of days, will resent the fact that it costs them money to do something else in the quiet times between timers / stratops.

Again, not a monetary issue if you have deep pockets or the group you belong to has deep pockets, but a psychological dampener. Maybe not a show stopper, for sure. Maybe it won't change a goddamn thing for the big sov players, for all I know (and it's little).

But if I try to convince a miner to come and try pew pewing with me and my merry band of rascals, to go out and fight your pilots like we did last week end, and it costs him on top of not being able to earn a living for 20+ hours? where today I've got about a chance in 2 to convince him, with that, I'll have 1 in 4. If he makes less of a living because of taxes, it drops even more. Less targets for you, if nothing else.

CAS, the NPC Corp that Does Stuff™

Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#599 - 2016-03-10 00:17:37 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Niko Zino wrote:
[quote=Frostys Virpio]

Now take the smaller group that goes after your sov. They can't afford any of these solutions, not realistically, on top of their expected ship losses. So they won't even try. Less fights, market or pvp wise. Congratulations to the top dogs, they win eve and can rat all day, since there is no opposition. Is that a desirable outcome?


So you won't be able to contest SOV because you have to pay up to 6 mill per jump cone? That is the reason why you would stop going in fleet taking on large SOV owner. For a 6 mill jump clone fee per pilot?

Has been reduced to 900K according to the source

Source

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

motie one
Secret Passage
#600 - 2016-03-10 00:24:36 UTC  |  Edited by: motie one
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:
CCP Ytterbium on 2016-02-11 wrote:
...we're probably going to increase market NPC taxes to make Citadel more attractive at some point.
I wish this was planned for "some point" after Citadels were released, they have many interesting carrots promoting their use, I'd like to see time allowed to work out issues and let you evaluate usage for at least a month following the Citadels expansion, before applying these sticks.

It really does not matter, If one decides on punishment , as a way to enforce acceptable behaviour, the punishment needs to be continuously increased until the desired behaviour is achieved, or you kill the child, whatever.....

Starting from smaller blows, or saying that you are a good parent really," just let me break your independence, I love you and it is your own fault I need to hit you harder and harder......" Doesn't quite ring true.

Great, impression you are giving CCP.
I have gone from really looking forward to citadels, to wondering If I am in an abusive relationship in less than a week.

Well, Guess We are going to find out shortly. I am guessing someone has decided, that Punishment to enforce compliance, is the way to go, and CCP are just listening to feedback to decide how much whipping is needed.

And undoing that decision just is not going to happen, at least then I will know the answer to my wondering.