open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: I Bring Gifts! (By Gifts I Mean Taxes, Sorry)
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 ... : last (18)

Author Topic

chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Posted - 2009.09.23 22:28:00 - [241]
 

Originally by: Ordais
@Soundwave
Nice that you realize it now that FW has this handycap. I remember how excited me and my friends had been about it, only to realize that the penalty for participating was much much higher then going to 0.0 and getting blown up a few times. Permanently getting your standing burned is just...well...many ppl told you so ;)



I agree that the standing issue is a problem, but it can be worked around. As long as you don't capture any plexes, do any fw missions or shoot enemy NPC's, you won't lose standings with empire factions. This works if you just want to pvp.

It's one of the many reasons plexing isn't done much in the gallente militia, which led to the loss of all their systems (but the pvp lives on). Not many people in their right mind, especially those with just one account, want to lose access to Jita forever.

CCP Soundwave


C C P Alliance
Posted - 2009.09.23 22:35:00 - [242]
 

Originally by: chatgris
Originally by: Ordais
@Soundwave
Nice that you realize it now that FW has this handycap. I remember how excited me and my friends had been about it, only to realize that the penalty for participating was much much higher then going to 0.0 and getting blown up a few times. Permanently getting your standing burned is just...well...many ppl told you so ;)



I agree that the standing issue is a problem, but it can be worked around. As long as you don't capture any plexes, do any fw missions or shoot enemy NPC's, you won't lose standings with empire factions. This works if you just want to pvp.

It's one of the many reasons plexing isn't done much in the gallente militia, which led to the loss of all their systems (but the pvp lives on). Not many people in their right mind, especially those with just one account, want to lose access to Jita forever.


Yea, it's not a problem unique to FW, but to any activity that involves plus and minus standings such as running missions for pirates. Ran into it by accident a looooooooong time ago when I wanted to run missions with a friend, and we found out he had less than 2 standing with whatever we were trying to run. I was a little surprised to find out how difficult it is to regain standings.

It should be possible to recover standings by running missions for an ally of the faction you have low standings with, but let's be honest; it's tedious and would take forever.

It's on my list of "things that annoy me".

chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Posted - 2009.09.23 23:48:00 - [243]
 

Edited by: chatgris on 23/09/2009 23:49:12
Originally by: CCP Soundwave


It's on my list of "things that annoy me".


While I may have the attention of a dev, I'd like to abuse it in a very concise and expediant manner for the good of plexing and fw. Hopefully I can add to your list.

1) When you are fighting in a plex, already under fire, nothing is more discouraging than getting ECM jammed and watching your target merrily warp away. ECM is discouraging for pvp.
2) If the faction is going to pay LP for missions, why not for plex captures that leads to system capture? Pay the pilots for what needs to be done.

EDIT: Have to say I am very encouraged by your annoyed by list as it is.

Thanks for your time, and sorry for derailing this thread. Not sorry enough to pass up the chance to blatantly whisper in the ear of a dev however :)

Casiella Truza
Ecliptic Rift
Posted - 2009.09.24 01:41:00 - [244]
 

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

It should be possible to recover standings by running missions for an ally of the faction you have low standings with, but let's be honest; it's tedious and would take forever.

It's on my list of "things that annoy me".


Actually, for folks that have run more than a few missions for any Empire factions, generally one of the "pirate alliances" (e.g. Angels-Serpentis-Syndicate) is totally inaccessible.

We'd love to see a way to recover these, even if it involves a lot of work.

Sinaroma
Posted - 2009.09.24 02:17:00 - [245]
 

""I sometimes read people complaining about how EVEs physics are unrealistic""... well i believe tht eve is completely well thought thru and belevieable :D! I love u CCP

Discord Logic
Posted - 2009.09.24 03:09:00 - [246]
 

Just to let You know how Ill counter this, +1 on the 1-man-corp list.

Captain Booyah
Dawn Vigil
Posted - 2009.09.24 03:18:00 - [247]
 

As the mission-running alt of a PVPer, I have already created myself a 1-man tax evasion corp.

I don't like the idea of making ISK 11% slower on a character I use rarely. I have no fear of wardecs either because I play this character so rarely that even if I was dec'ed by Privateers and Goons, I'd never see a WT.

Veldya
Guristari Freedom Fighters
Posted - 2009.09.24 05:19:00 - [248]
 

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

Yep. Another point a lot of people in this thread have mentioned that there should be more incentives for players to join corporations. I think it works both ways, I think there should be more incentives for corporations to recruit players too. Hopefully that's something we can put in at some point in the future.


The incentives should only be in the form of content that requires multiple people and has a better reward than what you can do on your own.

I liked the L5 mission concept, in theory. But, it forced PvE fitted ships into low-sec, which is more dangerous than nullsec as the gates and stations in these systems are often camped.

Some agents gave you missions into high-sec but even then the reward for the number of people required is probably lower than each doing L4s individually.

What i liked about wormholes was that it allowed smaller corps to do content cooperatively for reasonable reward but that is a higher level of challenge where it also includes the risk of full pvp.

If you have empire equivalent content with drone threats rather than sleepers and was within empire but required heavy cooperation for equivalent risk/reward which was far superior to L4s then there would be a natural attraction for people to migrate from mission running to that level of content as a natural progression.

Right now, there is no intermediate step that progresses from L4 equivalent content in Empire so you have this bottleneck in npc corps.

Penalising those in the bottleneck wont help the flow, having incentives for people to want to expand and grow will.

Arura Anders
Caldari
Arura Heavy Industries
Posted - 2009.09.24 05:35:00 - [249]
 

I have read alot of this thread but not all as i do not have the time. I don;t see this tax as bad in and of itself. I feel that the problem was in the way it was presented. Seriously a PR person that knows the game needs to read the Dev blogs before they go up. People get less upset when you chose a better approach to getting your point across. The RMT comment was unnecessary even if it is true. That stuff just invites flames instead of these discustions being constructive.

The Tax is ok as i said i feel that it should have been there all along as others have said. I kind of questioned that it was not when i started playing over a Year ago. There is no problem with using it as a ISK skin either. There need to be controls in any economy and you had them in place in the fees and what not when refining stuff and tax when something is sold. However the amount the NPC agents and bounties are giving out can't possibly be any where near the amount collected. With is why there is out of control inflation. Balancing that would be a good idea IMO. This is a way of doing that. JG. So please state it as that and that it makes PC and NPC corps more even and realistic.

The problem comes when you state that its your intention to use this to move people into PC corps and by association low sec and 0.0 space. Honestly a lot of your Paying customers do not what that type of game play. That is why the continue to pay to play, because it is available. If i wanted to play a blow'em up free for all I would play any number of other games. EVE allows for both types of play and i think that's wonderful. I can chose and even switch between play styles when i am board of one or the other. NPC's provide the safety from war mongers and provide many many gamers with an enjoyable fun interactive experience with out some war mongers interfering. I had limited play time not so long ago and when WD came down it at times kept me from playing when i wanted to. As i would get camped in a station and and no corps mates where available to help me out. Some times there are just not enough of them logged in. Most people have lives outside of EVE that need attending to. Switching to an ALT sounds great but with only being able to train one character at a time and not being able to afford more then one account. Its hard to have another character that can take part in the more advanced parts of the game such as higher level missions, WH's, and other exploration. If you want players in PC corps you have to provide a mechanism to avoid unwanted wars. Not everyone wants that type of game play.

I'd ask every one to consider that not all players have the RL resources to play the game as you do or you'd like them to. There are a good many ideas on this thread that are worth note to the Devs i hope they consider them.

may advice is Tax all income in NPC corps. and Allow PC corps to chose what they tax and do not tax and at what rate they want to. this will allow PC corps the advantage of not taxing contracts and market sales. while NPC crops take form every deposit into a players wallet. After all they are mega corps and we all know how greedy they can be in real life. But allow players to chose the NPC corp the want as you could set them up slightly differently if you wanted. It would also provide them the ability to still make a choice in the game and that will inevitably have an effect on your sandbox.

Future Mutant
Republic Military School
Posted - 2009.09.24 06:44:00 - [250]
 

Originally by: Arura Anders

may advice is Tax all income in NPC corps. and Allow PC corps to chose what they tax and do not tax and at what rate they want to. this will allow PC corps the advantage of not taxing contracts and market sales. while NPC crops take form every deposit into a players wallet. After all they are mega corps and we all know how greedy they can be in real life. But allow players to chose the NPC corp the want as you could set them up slightly differently if you wanted. It would also provide them the ability to still make a choice in the game and that will inevitably have an effect on your sandbox.


I like the general idea you had about letting eve be a sandbox but i think your missing the point when it comes to taxes. At the moment only mission rewards of isk and bounties are taxed- so player corp controls are a bit hypothetical. What we want are more incentives to join player corps- and im not sure extra tax options are the solution here.

Another thing most ppl have missed- Player corp taxes dont "poof". Ideally you are getting something for your taxes, prolly reduced or zero costs for ammo and ships perhaps. Maybe even a ship replacement program.

And before you say- "but players in npc corps get to enjoy the benefits of hisec" let me tell you- so do the majority of player corps. Only now npc corps are targeted to pay for the "privilege" every one else gets for free.

Now i ask mission runners in player corps- if you were given no benefits would you stay in your corp with a 11% tax?
Unless your stupid the answer is no- you wouldnt. Who would choose to make 11% less when he could avoid it.

And dont kid yourself- it will be avoided. I predict thousands of 1 man corps soon. Even if you have some delusion of it being against game rules to switch corps to avoid a war dek- It will happen repeatedly. Mission runners in npc corps will just start 3 player corps for each account they have. And bounce between them when wardeked.

The problem was ccp wanted to encourage ppl to join player corps. But theyve gone about it the wrong way. Instead of adding usable content (among other needed changes) they went with the 5 min fix- Tax the npc corp memebers. Good job, wont work- hack fixes rarely do.

Arura Anders
Caldari
Arura Heavy Industries
Posted - 2009.09.24 07:33:00 - [251]
 

Edited by: Arura Anders on 24/09/2009 07:54:20
Edited by: Arura Anders on 24/09/2009 07:40:44
Originally by: Future Mutant


I like the general idea you had about letting eve be a sandbox but i think your missing the point when it comes to taxes. At the moment only mission rewards of isk and bounties are taxed- so player corp controls are a bit hypothetical. What we want are more incentives to join player corps- and im not sure extra tax options are the solution here.


While you are right about adding taxes what i was getting at was to allow PC the ability to be more flexible about their taxes than the NPC. Sure they could tax everything like the NPC corp at a lower rate to attract people or they could just Tax bounties and nothing else at all. That would give them a distinct advantage over the NPC corps that will for our purposes here be Locked into a flat 11% tax on every thing. CCP could even help this with the default for corp creation set to Mission rewards and bounties only. That way unless its changed by player intervention its no worse then it is already.

Should you decide to leave the NPC corp world and go to a Corp where they Tax just like the NPC you can just find another that taxs how you feel is far. Its up to the PC Corp how attractive they make their Tax set up. If they want to draw members they will lower the rate and not tax so many things. Corps that follow the NPC model will eventually not have the recruitment level and fall.

I believe that the over all effort here is not to push players into PC corps but make them more attractive to Players. A PC corp that taxes only on mission rewards at 10% is way more attractive than an NPC Corp that taxes on every thing at 11%. This also ties into the emergance thing where PC corps now have more choices on how they tax their members. This will also benefit the new idea of sovereignty coming out and help spread the new costs of running a corp and its system evenly among its members. When they might have members that don't run missions or patrol the belts for rats.

For those that complain about the Tax its as simple as this if you want the protection of the NPC corp you have to pay for it. Nothing is free not even in EVE. That's how society as we know it works.

As far a coding it... obviously their is already in place a system that knows to only tax a few things and not others. It would only mean expanding an already existing structure. Then giving the CEO and directors access to change it for their corp.

Don't get me wrong in no way is this a fix for every thing wrong with NPC life vs PC life. War Decs still need over hauled for witch I also have a workable idea. The Devs are looking at taxes right now as a way to advantage the PC corp but not reprogram too much. as I am sure the programmers are busy with the all that's in the next update. This would be a compromise cause just adding a tax rate of 11% to NPC's is not going to accomplish much of any thing in the area they are looking for it to. Quick fixes never work well. It can't require too much code as is observable from a non Dev standpoint. While standing to the sandbox idea by giving the players more choices when creating and running a corp.

Psyche Lock
Posted - 2009.09.24 07:33:00 - [252]
 

I hope Soundwave is willing to bear the burden of lost accounts due to changes such as this. While mission running is only about a third of my income overall, I feel this tax is merely the tip of the iceberg.

This change is not to balance NPC corps vs PC corps. That's a flat out lie. Player corps can have no tax either if they want. This is an attempt to force more "fodder" into the PvP grinder. What CCP fails to realize is that Eve PvP for the most part, sucks. Its gank and spank. For the most part, its no skill, no tactics beyond "outnumber your foe, preferably many on one, run if the fight even appears to be even or against you".

I've got 2 accounts that have remained in their respective NPC starting corps for over 5 years. NPC corps don't have drama, they can't be wardec'd by idiots, they don't tax and generally, have a lot of people in the chat channel (mostly newbs) who I enjoy helping.

Eve has built a "sandbox" that isn't so "sandbox" anymore. Wormholes were an attempt to get PvEers into PvP space, obviously, it didn't work as well as they'd hoped. FW was an attempt to get PvEers into PvP and again, it failed miserably. What CCP fails to understand is, MOST of your players don't want to be forced intpo PvP situations. Hence why Empire is packed and lowsec zero sec is not. Even though all the goodies are out in open pvp space, the risk is not worth the reward for most people who have lives outside of the game.



Eve's attempts at forcing me into PvP I don't want keep annoying me more and more, and frankly, I am beginning to feel my 30 bucks a month could be better spent elsewhere. Instead of giving positive reasons for people to join player corps with all their inherent problems (drama, wardec, taxes, thieves, etc), they try to negatively force people into them. That's not a very smart move.

I forsee the creation of many one man corps, like others have said. I'm sure Soundwave will get around to nerfing that as soon as he can. So much for "develop and flourish" lol. Did Soundwave even THINK about this change beyond his hatred of RMT's? Apparently not.

•We would prefer that players join player corporations, or other entities that shape the world of EVE at a higher degree than the NPC corporations do, due to their impersonal and somewhat isolated role. That said, this change is not implemented to “destroy” NPC corps, they should be considered a small motivation to join a player corporation, where you can develop and flourish as a player.

How about letting players truly "sandbox" and leave ALL corps. No taxes, no wardecing, but still no capital ships, no sovreignty, no big chat room full of newbies.... (which apparently is a HUGE benefit lol)...

something somethingdark
Posted - 2009.09.24 07:41:00 - [253]
 

hey soundwave .... id still be willing to write that design document Rolling Eyes

Myz Toyou
the Organ Grinder and Company
Posted - 2009.09.24 08:29:00 - [254]
 

Originally by: Psyche Lock
I hope Soundwave is willing to bear the burden of lost accounts due to changes such as this. While mission running is only about a third of my income overall, I feel this tax is merely the tip of the iceberg.




Your stuff, I´ll take it, ktnxbye.

CCP Soundwave


C C P Alliance
Posted - 2009.09.24 08:49:00 - [255]
 

Originally by: Future Mutant
Originally by: Arura Anders

may advice is Tax all income in NPC corps. and Allow PC corps to chose what they tax and do not tax and at what rate they want to. this will allow PC corps the advantage of not taxing contracts and market sales. while NPC crops take form every deposit into a players wallet. After all they are mega corps and we all know how greedy they can be in real life. But allow players to chose the NPC corp the want as you could set them up slightly differently if you wanted. It would also provide them the ability to still make a choice in the game and that will inevitably have an effect on your sandbox.


I like the general idea you had about letting eve be a sandbox but i think your missing the point when it comes to taxes. At the moment only mission rewards of isk and bounties are taxed- so player corp controls are a bit hypothetical. What we want are more incentives to join player corps- and im not sure extra tax options are the solution here.

Another thing most ppl have missed- Player corp taxes dont "poof". Ideally you are getting something for your taxes, prolly reduced or zero costs for ammo and ships perhaps. Maybe even a ship replacement program.

And before you say- "but players in npc corps get to enjoy the benefits of hisec" let me tell you- so do the majority of player corps. Only now npc corps are targeted to pay for the "privilege" every one else gets for free.

Now i ask mission runners in player corps- if you were given no benefits would you stay in your corp with a 11% tax?
Unless your stupid the answer is no- you wouldnt. Who would choose to make 11% less when he could avoid it.



Two points here:

1. I've seen it stated multiple times that players "get something in return" for their taxes in player run corporations. That's hardly a guarantee, and while you may be in a good corporation that gives you ship reimbursement and so forth, you can just as easily be in a corporation where you don't see a single isk returned during your time there.

2. 11% is a relatively low rate to pay to stay in a corporation that offers you complete immunity from wars, instability and all the other issues that NPC corporations run into. Any notion here that there is no advantage to being in an NPC corporation, even after this change, is pretty far out.

Julian Lynq
Posted - 2009.09.24 09:17:00 - [256]
 

Ccp soundwave:

Since this is a highly controversal topic (Thread in GD ~30 pages, similar the Thread in testserver fourms) are you willing to offer a form of communication over it that allows us to have all questions answered and not just selective ones ? Possibly in the form of a LiveDevBlog or similar ?

Kerfira
Kerfira Corp
Posted - 2009.09.24 09:22:00 - [257]
 

Originally by: Psyche Lock
Even though all the goodies are out in open pvp space, the risk is not worth the reward for most people who have lives outside of the game.

This is actually not true....

Apart from T2 BPO(!) production, high-end moon mining or running high-level plex (which requires more than 1 person), the best income for any single player who can't be online for extended periods at a time is running high-sec L4 missions!
It beats single player exploration, mining, ratting, wormholes, manufacturing, PvP (hah!), etc...

The only partial competitor is Trading, but as trading has a zero-impact (or slightly negative) on the amount of different resources in the game, it is not a concern. It is not a profession that can scale well either. It works well when only a few people 'play the market', but if 10% of EVE's players started doing it, it'd not work.

Ratting can come close, but you'll have to spend maybe an hour getting the system you're running in 'agroed'. You'll also have to get one of the few low true-sec systems to yourself without hostiles interacting. In missions, you'll be shooting battleships coming to you like on an assembly line!

The standard way for 0.0'ers to make money is to have a high-sec alt grinding missions. You can even do it while you PvP in 0.0 since it doesn't require all that much attention.

This is probably the main reason that so many players are in NPC corp. Simply because the best paying game content is in high-sec, and doesn't require teamwork to get. The proposed 'solution' will do nothing about this. It'll merely move mission runners to 1-man corp if they care about the 11% (which is closer to 4-5% if you salvage/loot), or stay in their NPC corp.
Why? Simply because the 'solution' doesn't make player corp more attractive, it simply makes NPC corp less attractive, making 1-man corp the best solution.

If CCP really wanted to do something about NPC corp member count, then they'd cut high-sec L4 income in half! That'd make 0.0 ratting attractive, even with the associated risk. If they at the same time implemented content that benefited having many players working together, that'd help even more (though tbh I can't think of anything of that type that couldn't be exploited by single players).
If at the same time the wardec and corp mechanics were updated to remove the obvious pay-to-grief elements, THEN we'd have a solution that actually WAS one!

CCP Soundwave


C C P Alliance
Posted - 2009.09.24 09:22:00 - [258]
 

Originally by: Julian Lynq
Ccp soundwave:

Since this is a highly controversal topic (Thread in GD ~30 pages, similar the Thread in testserver fourms) are you willing to offer a form of communication over it that allows us to have all questions answered and not just selective ones ? Possibly in the form of a LiveDevBlog or similar ?


Probably not, no Sad Alternatively, come to fanfest and ask me!

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.09.24 09:23:00 - [259]
 

Originally by: Arura Anders

While you are right about adding taxes what i was getting at was to allow PC the ability to be more flexible about their taxes than the NPC. Sure they could tax everything like the NPC corp at a lower rate to attract people or they could just Tax bounties and nothing else at all. That would give them a distinct advantage over the NPC corps that will for our purposes here be Locked into a flat 11% tax on every thing. CCP could even help this with the default for corp creation set to Mission rewards and bounties only. That way unless its changed by player intervention its no worse then it is already.



What you miss is that your idea is the way to get rampant inflation (I have a 11% sales tax, I must pass it to the costumer) and that most items sold on market have a profit margin way lower than 11%.

What you are proposing is essentially a VAT tax and that kind of tax is paid by the consumer as increased costs.

Add something like that and the next week we will have 300 pages of a thread about "one man corp producers undercutting everyone as they don't pay the tax, fix the tax".

Even if taxing only the bounties and mission rewards is a "easy solution", taxing market transactions with a variable tax is the "nightmare solution".

Everyone trying to build and sell something or selling minerals in a corporation applying the tax would be at great disadvantage against corporations without the tax.

That would tear apart a lots of existing corps in weeks and simply encourage the creations of single player "trading corps".

Julian Lynq
Posted - 2009.09.24 09:29:00 - [260]
 

Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: Julian Lynq
Ccp soundwave:

Since this is a highly controversal topic (Thread in GD ~30 pages, similar the Thread in testserver fourms) are you willing to offer a form of communication over it that allows us to have all questions answered and not just selective ones ? Possibly in the form of a LiveDevBlog or similar ?


Probably not, no Sad Alternatively, come to fanfest and ask me!


Sadly I currently do not have enough of a financial backbone to afford that. Contrary to CCP PrismX´s believes of my RMT richness.

CCP Soundwave


C C P Alliance
Posted - 2009.09.24 09:35:00 - [261]
 

Originally by: Julian Lynq
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: Julian Lynq
Ccp soundwave:

Since this is a highly controversal topic (Thread in GD ~30 pages, similar the Thread in testserver fourms) are you willing to offer a form of communication over it that allows us to have all questions answered and not just selective ones ? Possibly in the form of a LiveDevBlog or similar ?


Probably not, no Sad Alternatively, come to fanfest and ask me!


Sadly I currently do not have enough of a financial backbone to afford that. Contrary to CCP PrismX´s believes of my RMT richness.


I see what you did there Very Happy

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.09.24 09:39:00 - [262]
 

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

Two points here:

1. I've seen it stated multiple times that players "get something in return" for their taxes in player run corporations. That's hardly a guarantee, and while you may be in a good corporation that gives you ship reimbursement and so forth, you can just as easily be in a corporation where you don't see a single isk returned during your time there.

2. 11% is a relatively low rate to pay to stay in a corporation that offers you complete immunity from wars, instability and all the other issues that NPC corporations run into. Any notion here that there is no advantage to being in an NPC corporation, even after this change, is pretty far out.



Excuse me, but this reply seem to mean that badly run corporations should be better than the NPC corporations.

Why bad corporations should be substantially subsidized by CCP?

Give people better system to find good corporations and avoid the bad ones and you will get more people in the player run corporations with multiple players.

Re-read your point 1. Why you or anyone should stay in a corporation that don't give anything back?
As I already stated there is no need for a monetary return.
A banal example can be a good corporation BPO protfolio available to the players through locked BPO or copies, POS research labs access (even if it require a bit more trust), and so on.

Your idea of what a player run corporation should be:

Quote:
If you are in the habit of bossing people or pets around in real life, you may just want to start your own corporation.


seem pretty negative.

You really think that having a frustrated "want to be the boss" as a CEO would be a positive experience for the players?



CCP Soundwave


C C P Alliance
Posted - 2009.09.24 09:41:00 - [263]
 

Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: CCP Soundwave


Your idea of what a player run corporation should be:

Quote:
If you are in the habit of bossing people or pets around in real life, you may just want to start your own corporation.


seem pretty negative.

You really think that having a frustrated "want to be the boss" as a CEO would be a positive experience for the players?




No. I think that was a pretty obvious joke that you've chosen to take out of context to fit into your own agenda Cool

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.09.24 09:54:00 - [264]
 

Edited by: Venkul Mul on 24/09/2009 09:54:57
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: CCP Soundwave


Your idea of what a player run corporation should be:

Quote:
If you are in the habit of bossing people or pets around in real life, you may just want to start your own corporation.


seem pretty negative.

You really think that having a frustrated "want to be the boss" as a CEO would be a positive experience for the players?




No. I think that was a pretty obvious joke that you've chosen to take out of context to fit into your own agenda Cool


Can is say that you just did the same?

So I repeat the question.

Whay you feel that CCP should change the game so that even badly run corporations will be better than the NPC corporations?

And I refer explicitly to your example of corporations giving nothing back for the taxes.





Caldor Mansi
Posted - 2009.09.24 10:07:00 - [265]
 

Edited by: Caldor Mansi on 24/09/2009 10:25:44
Originally by: CCP Soundwave

Two points here:

1. I've seen it stated multiple times that players "get something in return" for their taxes in player run corporations. That's hardly a guarantee, and while you may be in a good corporation that gives you ship reimbursement and so forth, you can just as easily be in a corporation where you don't see a single isk returned during your time there.

2. 11% is a relatively low rate to pay to stay in a corporation that offers you complete immunity from wars, instability and all the other issues that NPC corporations run into. Any notion here that there is no advantage to being in an NPC corporation, even after this change, is pretty far out.


1) Maybe you don't understand the difference between choice and guarantee?

2) THIS.

This is the only valid reason for a change to NPC corps.
It is very very sad you had to realize this AFTER you made this change, AFTER you wrote a dev blog, AFTER you had to read xx pages of objections and discussion.

In other words, you need to go through all this to find out a valid reason for the change. That's how you work? First do, then think?

Nidhiesk
Posted - 2009.09.24 11:49:00 - [266]
 

Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: Future Mutant
Instead of penalties to those without a corp- how about some incentives for player corps to recruit?

You would be hard pressed to find a null corp that open recruits. It doesnt happen.
Renters in null may recruit- but members of a renter corp often=slaves.

If you want player corps to recruit- especially if you want them to open recruit low sp players- Then give them the reason to do so.


Yep. Another point a lot of people in this thread have mentioned that there should be more incentives for players to join corporations. I think it works both ways, I think there should be more incentives for corporations to recruit players too. Hopefully that's something we can put in at some point in the future.


Tell me how or why ? No its not a joke and believe me I have experience at being a CEO. Here are some points that really freaks me out and, I have to be honest here, being really afraid of:

  1. Corp thief YARRRR!!: why, cause if they steal it, nothing is done to reimburse me. Sure I understand what trust is but will I risk it ? nope, I hesitate to recruit

  2. new members joining and kill other members Shocked: that is just plain stupid and nothing can be done or prevented about this. you never now. In that case, I still hesitate to recruit.

  3. new member with a past trouble: new guys comes in and BAM, you got a wardec: 1+1 =2 or you try to make it 2 so you ask the wardecer the story and he tells you about the new guy...mh mh. in that case, I hesitate too

  4. Wardec Twisted Evil: when you recruit, you get new guys in your corp no matter what (you get scouted and all). Its visible and you look like a big chocolate cake and a naked women on the side that says come get me, im hot. Ok, I went a bit too far with my example but you get the idea, that corp is juicy. Still in this case, I hesitate



Alright, of course theres always a solution to these problems but the risk is still there and as a CEO you don't want your corp members to go away cause like it or not if the new guys in your corp (experience or time) see that your corp is always wardeced. Well chances are some members will leave.

So if you saw my previous post, it revolves around the same problem so I leave it at that.

Mahai Ano
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2009.09.24 12:00:00 - [267]
 

Edited by: Mahai Ano on 24/09/2009 12:00:31
I really want realistic physics. By realistic physics, I mean "bomb the sh*te out of planets, especially after dusk starts". Twisted Evil

Can I has exploding planets phleause? I promise to be (aiming) good!

Jonathan Calvert
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2009.09.24 12:26:00 - [268]
 

Originally by: Future Mutant
Since only npc members pay empire taxes i think only npc members should receive concord protection.

It doesnt seem fair to me that other cpts get this service for free.

Also- creating and switching your one man corp is not an exploit- even if it becomes one it will never be able to be enforced. There will literally be thousands of petitions (per day) crying about the "undekable one man corp" soon- good luck with that.


Actually everyone gets CONCORD protection for free. The tax on npc corps pays for wardec immunity.

Kerfira
Kerfira Corp
Posted - 2009.09.24 12:35:00 - [269]
 

Originally by: Jonathan Calvert
Actually everyone gets CONCORD protection for free. The tax on npc corps pays for wardec immunity.

You're wrong. To quote from the dev blog:
Originally by: Blog
It seems like an unrealistic scenario that the empires in EVE provide infrastructure, security and a host of other financially demanding services at no cost.

So the RP reason given for the NPC corp tax is that it pays for the services provided by the empires. That it's a pretty crappy reason given that all player corp are given the same service by the empires makes it more laughable.

If the empires charged for their services, player corp should ALSO pay the tax!

A much better solution would simply have been to call it an administration tax set by the NPC corp and leave it at that. At least that way the RP reason wouldn't have more holes in it than Swiss cheese....

CCP Eris Discordia

Posted - 2009.09.24 13:50:00 - [270]
 

Originally by: Ordais

Oh, btw, noone seems to mention the obvious, CCP doing this to get money out of the system...yes? Main motivation i think...


It really isn't, if we wanted it to be an isk sink it would have been a lot more than 11%. We picked 11% because it's only a few percent higher than the average tax in player corporations.

The relation to player corporations is important because we want to balance the NPC corporations vs player corporations a bit more, and ideally make it more tempting to join a player corporation than it is now.

We will be keeping a close watch to what happens when this change hits tq Smile


Pages: first : previous : ... 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 ... : last (18)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only