These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Germaq
No Clams
#81 - 2016-03-03 16:35:01 UTC
Hairpins Blueprint wrote:
MachineOfLovingGrace wrote:
While I like the idea of more player control about eve, this is moving too far into the regions where other players can effectively control how and where I play eve for my taste. Eve is already a game that is at times as tedious and overcomplicated as it's fun and engaging. The market and jumpclone changes will only make this worse, even more so if you are a casual player without some big alliance logistic backbone. Every change that makes actual gameplay require more logistic/clicks/hassle in general will make casual scrubs like me pause and think if hitting "find game" in CS:GO isn't the better use of my time. Don't lose the "small guy" from focus when you plan some big poweblock endgame.



?

Just build your own Citadel and set tax to 0 for yourself problem solved.

No limit to JC in station / removing timer when swaping clone in same station.


Bad changes? lol this is amazing for pvp. go on small Nano Roam with snakes / than swap for crystals for solo and than swap for slaves into bigger fleet or whatever.


Looks perfect for me ^^



It's great for the serious PVP player who has wealth and expertise. It's horrid for a casual player, raising the bar for them. Lots of people but a ship, fly it for an hour, log off and come back next Saturday night and repeat until they die. They then go back to a known, stocked hub, for a new ship and repeat. Expanded options should not drive out this kind of player.
Memphis Baas
#82 - 2016-03-03 16:35:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Memphis Baas
For everyone complaining of higher NPC taxes (here and in the reddit thread): CCP needs to have more ISK sinks, which they are achieving through the higher taxes and through the ISK loss rather than mineral loss for refining.

For CCP: if you really want to introduce a strong ISK sink, you have to introduce something that the people with trillions of ISK want to buy. We really wanted to buy the skill injectors; you saw how much plex trade that caused. Find something that's as desirable. Maybe some new skins, I don't know.

EDIT: Also, everyone predicting that people will ignore citadel markets and stay in Jita, that's true, until they remove Jita. I believe the end goal is to have NO NPC stations at all. So the whole "recovering your assets is free" thing is eventually not going to be quite true. It should be interesting to see; no game has ever modeled an economic collapse before, and EVE's economy is quite an advanced simulator, pretty much the perfect testing platform.
MachineOfLovingGrace
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#83 - 2016-03-03 16:37:47 UTC
Hairpins Blueprint wrote:


?

Just build your own Citadel and set tax to 0 for yourself problem solved.

No limit to JC in station / removing timer when swaping clone in same station.


Bad changes? lol this is amazing for pvp. go on small Nano Roam with snakes / than swap for crystals for solo and than swap for slaves into bigger fleet or whatever.


Looks perfect for me ^^


We might have different definitions of the word "just" then. ;)
RainReaper
RRN Industries
#84 - 2016-03-03 16:38:17 UTC
I have a question. since you are merging reprocessing and compression services will the new module require 10 blocks every hour? Because each induvidual module required 5 blocks att first i guess it would only make sence? Oh and another thing i dont think anyone have brought up. Medium citadels are meant to replace the starbases, and starbase's Repreocessing modules could only reprocess ores and such. Can we reprocess modules and ships inside a Astrahus?
rsantos
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#85 - 2016-03-03 16:42:09 UTC
Boo! just bad!

especialy the "no limits" on citadels... Fisics says no to ulimited office space! limited office space will bring more income to citadel owners than increasing taxes on npc station. Just saying!
Johnathan Severasse
Dixon Cox Butte Preservation Society
#86 - 2016-03-03 16:50:31 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Niko Zino wrote:
Stuff


Initial figures show us maintaining a cloning bay in a Citadel will cost 157m ISK a month, we wanted to provide means for the owner to recoup that cost and even make a profit in general.


No poors allowed.
Akrasjel Lanate
Lanate Industries
#87 - 2016-03-03 16:50:58 UTC
Memphis Baas wrote:
For everyone complaining of higher NPC taxes (here and in the reddit thread): CCP needs to have more ISK sinks, which they are achieving through the higher taxes and through the ISK loss rather than mineral loss for refining.

For CCP: if you really want to introduce a strong ISK sink, you have to introduce something that the people with trillions of ISK want to buy. We really wanted to buy the skill injectors; you saw how much plex trade that caused. Find something that's as desirable. Maybe some new skins, I don't know.


They could remove insurence Blink

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude

Memphis Baas
#88 - 2016-03-03 16:51:27 UTC
rsantos wrote:
Limited office space will bring more income to citadel owners.


That's only true if they keep the current mechanic where rent prices increase based on how full the station is.

But they're not keeping that mechanic. Rent prices in citadels will stay the same until it's full, then you won't be able to rent more offices there. So instead of the server-calculated price, the citadel owner can just log in everyday and increase his fees based on how many people have an office, without reaching a cap where more renters are artificially prevented from renting.

Citadel owners will get to play a game that CCP is playing every day: change prices and watch how many people cancel the subscription. Lower the price, get more rentals, increase the price get fewer rentals. Complete control for the citadel owner. Complete repercussions. NO artificial limits.

I like.
Dave Stark
#89 - 2016-03-03 16:51:37 UTC
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:
Memphis Baas wrote:
For everyone complaining of higher NPC taxes (here and in the reddit thread): CCP needs to have more ISK sinks, which they are achieving through the higher taxes and through the ISK loss rather than mineral loss for refining.

For CCP: if you really want to introduce a strong ISK sink, you have to introduce something that the people with trillions of ISK want to buy. We really wanted to buy the skill injectors; you saw how much plex trade that caused. Find something that's as desirable. Maybe some new skins, I don't know.


They could remove insurence Blink


or incursions.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#90 - 2016-03-03 16:51:44 UTC
Memphis Baas wrote:
For everyone complaining of higher NPC taxes (here and in the reddit thread): CCP needs to have more ISK sinks, which they are achieving through the higher taxes and through the ISK loss rather than mineral loss for refining.

For CCP: if you really want to introduce a strong ISK sink, you have to introduce something that the people with trillions of ISK want to buy. We really wanted to buy the skill injectors; you saw how much plex trade that caused. Find something that's as desirable. Maybe some new skins, I don't know.

EDIT: Also, everyone predicting that people will ignore citadel markets and stay in Jita, that's true, until they remove Jita. I believe the end goal is to have NO NPC stations at all. So the whole "recovering your assets is free" thing is eventually not going to be quite true. It should be interesting to see; no game has ever modeled an economic collapse before, and EVE's economy is quite an advanced simulator, pretty much the perfect testing platform.



If people ignore citadels markets then that will be evidence that the npc trading taxes have been set too low...

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Memphis Baas
#91 - 2016-03-03 17:03:26 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
If people ignore citadels markets then that will be evidence that the npc trading taxes have been set too low...


In theory, yes. In practice, adversity to risk is the same as people refusing to move to player corps (because of wardecs) or into lowsec.
rsantos
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#92 - 2016-03-03 17:05:38 UTC
Memphis Baas wrote:
rsantos wrote:
Limited office space will bring more income to citadel owners.


That's only true if they keep the current mechanic where rent prices increase based on how full the station is.

But they're not keeping that mechanic. Rent prices in citadels will stay the same until it's full, then you won't be able to rent more offices there. So instead of the server-calculated price, the citadel owner can just log in everyday and increase his fees based on how many people have an office, without reaching a cap where more renters are artificially prevented from renting.

Citadel owners will get to play a game that CCP is playing every day: change prices and watch how many people cancel the subscription. Lower the price, get more rentals, increase the price get fewer rentals. Complete control for the citadel owner. Complete repercussions. NO artificial limits.

I like.



Unlimited office space makes no sense. Space is not unlimited and is not artifical!
Want more office space? Build a bigger citadel or build more citadels with more space to make offices!
Akrasjel Lanate
Lanate Industries
#93 - 2016-03-03 17:11:15 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:
Memphis Baas wrote:
For everyone complaining of higher NPC taxes (here and in the reddit thread): CCP needs to have more ISK sinks, which they are achieving through the higher taxes and through the ISK loss rather than mineral loss for refining.

For CCP: if you really want to introduce a strong ISK sink, you have to introduce something that the people with trillions of ISK want to buy. We really wanted to buy the skill injectors; you saw how much plex trade that caused. Find something that's as desirable. Maybe some new skins, I don't know.


They could remove insurence Blink


or incursions.

Or rebalance mission to give more LP and less ISK

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude

Akrasjel Lanate
Lanate Industries
#94 - 2016-03-03 17:12:47 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Memphis Baas wrote:
For everyone complaining of higher NPC taxes (here and in the reddit thread): CCP needs to have more ISK sinks, which they are achieving through the higher taxes and through the ISK loss rather than mineral loss for refining.

For CCP: if you really want to introduce a strong ISK sink, you have to introduce something that the people with trillions of ISK want to buy. We really wanted to buy the skill injectors; you saw how much plex trade that caused. Find something that's as desirable. Maybe some new skins, I don't know.

EDIT: Also, everyone predicting that people will ignore citadel markets and stay in Jita, that's true, until they remove Jita. I believe the end goal is to have NO NPC stations at all. So the whole "recovering your assets is free" thing is eventually not going to be quite true. It should be interesting to see; no game has ever modeled an economic collapse before, and EVE's economy is quite an advanced simulator, pretty much the perfect testing platform.



If people ignore citadels markets then that will be evidence that the npc trading taxes have been set too low...

Does this means you want to punish people living in/from NPC stations

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude

Saisin
Chao3's Rogue Operatives Corp
#95 - 2016-03-03 17:14:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Saisin
It all sounds good to me. The increase of NPC taxes will help make the citadels, their location and their defense, meaningful.

I particularly like the taxing of Jump Clones in NPC stations. I'd even like to see an even higher tax in null sec stations... Jump clones are still a very fast way to move a pilot across the universe with no risks, so once Citadels can offer cheaper JC platform, the cost of "teleportation", especially behind enemy lines in NPC areas, should not be trivial.

Vote Borat Guereen for CSM XII

Check out the Minarchist Space Project

Rob Kaichin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#96 - 2016-03-03 17:14:52 UTC
Malcanis wrote:


If people ignore citadels markets then that will be evidence that the npc trading taxes have been set too low...



This is more a matter of CCP's philosophy than of CCP's science...

Does CCP want Citadels to be used? Yes.

How much do they want them to be used? Currently to the range of 5-6% taxes.

Personally, beating people with a stick is something CCP was told was awful when it affected Null. Obviously people believe that beating High and Low with a stick is somehow more acceptable...
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#97 - 2016-03-03 17:15:11 UTC
Reprocessing tax in isk in NPC stations means more minerals on the market. Interesting.

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart

Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
CK-0FF
Intergalactic Space Hobos
#98 - 2016-03-03 17:19:07 UTC
Memphis Baas wrote:
For everyone complaining of higher NPC taxes (here and in the reddit thread): CCP needs to have more ISK sinks, which they are achieving through the higher taxes and through the ISK loss rather than mineral loss for refining.

For CCP: if you really want to introduce a strong ISK sink, you have to introduce something that the people with trillions of ISK want to buy. We really wanted to buy the skill injectors; you saw how much plex trade that caused. Find something that's as desirable. Maybe some new skins, I don't know.

EDIT: Also, everyone predicting that people will ignore citadel markets and stay in Jita, that's true, until they remove Jita. I believe the end goal is to have NO NPC stations at all. So the whole "recovering your assets is free" thing is eventually not going to be quite true. It should be interesting to see; no game has ever modeled an economic collapse before, and EVE's economy is quite an advanced simulator, pretty much the perfect testing platform.

The problem with skill injectors is that they aren't an isk sink. They're a PLEX and SP sink, but not a cent of isk leaves the economy except through the taxes incurred buying the injectors. If extractors were to cost isk instead of Aurum/real money, they would indeed be an effective isk sink.
Rob Kaichin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#99 - 2016-03-03 17:21:56 UTC
CCP, if you have a problem with how people are using jump clones now, don't inflict costs on the players to stop them using it. Just roll back the faction standings eradiciation and make Jump Clones meaningful again.
Robert Parr
Iron Tiger T3 Industries
#100 - 2016-03-03 17:32:32 UTC
Muon Farstrider wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
We are planning to increase that amount to 5m ISK to install a jump clone in NPC stations. That price will also be payable anytime a clone is left behind in a NPC station - so, if you jump clone away from a NPC station from previously established jump clones you will still pay that price.


Wat. Every time I jump out of a clone while docked in an NPC station I'm going to have to pay 5m isk? That's absurd. 5m for initial installation is a bit of a steep jump from the existing fees but reasonable for a one-time cost, but essentially a 5m fee every time you want to use the jump clone system is crazy.

Please tell me I'm misinterpreting this, or if I'm not, please think that through a bit more. Not everyone lives somewhere where there'll be abundant friendly citadels to get around that - and to boot, the people who don't (hisec/lowsec dwellers) are also the ones who are most likely to have a large, spread-out geographic area that they use the current jump clone system to get around in.




Yes, have to agree with this and asking for constructive feedback when you slap people in the face with this kind of insult is a bit much don't you think? If you want to increase the installation fee, fine I get it but, every time I jump?? That's a whole new fee and I have enough obstacles to deal with in this game without you coming up with new ways to hamstring players. I hope you are actually listening on this one and it's not another "Fozzysov" or "skill injectors" idea where you say you're listening to feedback but really you don't care what players think.ShockedShockedShocked