These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Use Concorde Tax on Suicide Ganked Cargo as ISK Sink
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
NanDe YaNen
Moira.
#1 - 2017-04-16 13:50:17 UTC
Where can we extract a lot of ISK from the economy to account for ratting and mission running?

Let's start with someone else's problem. Whenever gankers suicide gank with alts and pick up the loot, they use unaffiliated accounts in order to acquire the loot because the gank accounts lose security status and can't get to the can.

No problem.

Let's apply a tax to the cargo.


  1. Cargo is flagged when non-wardec gank happens in system with security > 0.0
  2. Flagged cargo is not able to be sold on market or entered into contract until tax is paid
  3. Tax rate depends on both the security where the cargo was regarded as stolen and where the cargo gets put onto market
  4. War-dec loot no problem
  5. 0.0 stolen loot no problem
  6. 0.0 delivered loot no problem
  7. Ganked outside Rens station and sold in Rens, holy crap expensive
  8. Base tax on estimate used in assets window


Everyone's happier that this tax is applied according to the severity of the security violation and usually will affect suicide gankers using new accounts that feel more like an abuse of alpha accounts than intended game mechanics? I'll accept your applause. Seriously. Who's complaining? Maybe you should live outside Jita occasionally.

The only person not happier is a suicide ganker that needs to get 5bn ISK liquid to sell that loot or somehow get it to low sec so that they can move the gear, and now they can join the risk reward club.


I'm preparing a doctrine for Liberal Universalism. Because the doctrine is heavily focused on trade, the broker fees and sales tax are generally regarded as an enemy to all pod pilots. The fact is that this tax is not set by any market. The spreads are set somewhat by the tax.

This proposal is one of many that will be made for the benefit of the universe. Please set standings negative if you have a problem, and do so LIBERALLY.
Old Man Prae
Threat Contained
The Initiative.
#2 - 2017-04-22 04:34:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Old Man Prae
As cool as this sounds it will never happen. Reason is this. Suicide ganks etc take isk out of market. But add the tax your encouraging it. That said long run it would kill high sec. Then they'll go after everyone. High sec will die due to no freight. Thus economy dies. That would lead to no alphas making money......
And no alphas mean no long term subscriptions. Thus game stagnates with people who been here a long time.
Will the game die. No but its one of those things.....why did they resort to alpha accounts.......
NanDe YaNen
Moira.
#3 - 2017-04-22 09:47:11 UTC
Old Man Prae wrote:
Suicide ganks etc take isk out of market
Goods, not ISK. I don't understand the rest of our reply. If the goods are subject to market re-entry tax, it makes ganks less profitable in terms of ISK because to avoid market re-entry tax, you have to ship those goods.

The real losers would be nullsec dwellers having to blow up gankers trying to haul their goods to NPC or open stations to avoid tax. Takes a lot of ammo and exerts intel burden. Hope the goods make up for it.
Old Man Prae
Threat Contained
The Initiative.
#4 - 2017-04-22 15:02:08 UTC
Let me clarify. I think of all goods as isk. It takes isk to buy goods. Guy gets ganked, losses his isk in the form of goods. The guy doing the ganking has a buddy that picks up the goods sells them for isk. So goods equal isk .
With the tax thing it would have to be tax from concord not any individual corporation or what I said would happen. Second you'd have to tag all the goods with that tag so that if you do get ganked you can prevent or whatever the ganker and his buddies from profiting off of it.

Id suggest that you have a secondary insurance like you do on ships to be on your cargo.....at like 75% of est amount that way you prevent people from gaming the system.

When it comes to gankers I find it hard that null sec players would have to blow up gankers to ensure there goods get to market.
Theres other ways to ensure that your goods get to the designated npc or market.

If you goal is to prevent ganks then just have CCP just prevent people from ganking each other in high sec. War dec no prob go for it. But in the long run isk removed from ganks either in the form of ships or goods it still profits CCP while it really only hurts new players. Thus going back to my original post. Won't happen.
NanDe YaNen
Moira.
#5 - 2017-04-22 22:00:02 UTC
Old Man Prae wrote:
If you goal is to prevent ganks


Goal is to sink ISK. CCP is basically sinking all of the ISK via trade if you look at the numbers. Liberal Universalists takes the position that the brokerage fee hinders trade, but citidels can fix that, which leaves a problem: where will the ISK get ground up if player economy quickly shifts to citadels?

Read up on inflation to have a good model of currency vs goods.
Toxic Yaken
Slavers Union
Something Really Pretentious
#6 - 2017-05-09 21:26:30 UTC
NanDe YaNen wrote:
Where can we extract a lot of ISK from the economy to account for ratting and mission running?

Let's start with someone else's problem. Whenever gankers suicide gank with alts and pick up the loot, they use unaffiliated accounts in order to acquire the loot because the gank accounts lose security status and can't get to the can.

No problem.

Let's apply a tax to the cargo.


  1. Cargo is flagged when non-wardec gank happens in system with security > 0.0
  2. Flagged cargo is not able to be sold on market or entered into contract until tax is paid
  3. Tax rate depends on both the security where the cargo was regarded as stolen and where the cargo gets put onto market
  4. War-dec loot no problem
  5. 0.0 stolen loot no problem
  6. 0.0 delivered loot no problem
  7. Ganked outside Rens station and sold in Rens, holy crap expensive
  8. Base tax on estimate used in assets window


Everyone's happier that this tax is applied according to the severity of the security violation and usually will affect suicide gankers using new accounts that feel more like an abuse of alpha accounts than intended game mechanics? I'll accept your applause. Seriously. Who's complaining? Maybe you should live outside Jita occasionally.

The only person not happier is a suicide ganker that needs to get 5bn ISK liquid to sell that loot or somehow get it to low sec so that they can move the gear, and now they can join the risk reward club.


I'm preparing a doctrine for Liberal Universalism. Because the doctrine is heavily focused on trade, the broker fees and sales tax are generally regarded as an enemy to all pod pilots. The fact is that this tax is not set by any market. The spreads are set somewhat by the tax.

This proposal is one of many that will be made for the benefit of the universe. Please set standings negative if you have a problem, and do so LIBERALLY.


As someone who largely survives off of ganking for funding my activities, I don't personally like this idea, though it would be neat to see the black market trading for larger ticket items through trade windows to avoid paying these taxes. Of course, players could also just sell stuff in citadels where there are player set tax rates.

Also what do you mean with your point about Alpha gankers?

Curator of the Wardec Project - Join our Discord to join the discussions about Wardecs
NanDe YaNen
Moira.
#7 - 2017-05-18 11:05:14 UTC
Quote:
Also what do you mean with your point about Alpha gankers?


I'm only recently coming back to the game after a long break. IIRC a highsec gank usually is done with alts either to shoot things or to scoop loot to avoid being associated with the criminals as far as Concode is concerned.

About using citadels to avoid the tax, I'm not 100% sure. I was under the impression that sales tax is levied even at citadels while citadel owners set the brokerage fee.

In any case, moving to WH space or nullsec is a perfectly fine safety valve that requires exposure to risk. I can't imagine allowing setting the stolen goods tax rate as this is part of the relationship lowsec and highsec citadels would have with Concorde; a tax-free haven would be nullsec or WH space, not a citadel receiving Concode protection from random blaps happening outside.
NanDe YaNen
Moira.
#8 - 2017-05-18 11:22:56 UTC
Quote:
As someone who largely survives off of ganking for funding my activities


Just a curiosity, do you mostly hisec gank or lowsec gank?

I concur with your judgement that ultimately this would shift ISK sinking onto a smaller number of players than uniform brokerage fees and sales tax.

Is it healthy for the game overall? I could see more colorful relationships between low and nullsec, such as moving goods to nullsec to launder them and taking them back to highsec. I could foresee camping a 0.1 instead of a 0.4 to get better tax rates and making sec status less trinary.