EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2013-06-15 01:00
  • First Forum Visit: 2013-10-24 17:59
  • Number of Posts: 53
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 74

Niko Zino

Security Status 5.0
  • Center for Advanced Studies Member since
  • Gallente Federation Faction

Last 20 Posts

  • [UI] monospace and emojis in Council of Stellar Management

    Can't believe a search for emoji returns nothing on the forums o.O

    We all love ASCII art. Eve is kind of retrofuturist at this point in terms of text communication, but my fellow CAS members are increasingly frustrated with the lack of emoji support in eve's chatboxes...

    I know we can try to do asciiart (I'm looking at you TEST), but without monospace fonts it's harder than it should.

    Can we please think about modernizing the font used in game? it's a small thing that may make a lot of people squeal in delight.

    I know this is kind of a trivial matter in comparison to HS wardeccing, the Frigate Menace, and all the big topics, but I'm only half joking when I bring that up.

  • Does CAS have a higher retention rate than the others? in EVE Communication Center

    Oh and of course, the hit and runners, more often than not, are just alts who exist in CAS for a handful of hours.

  • Does CAS have a higher retention rate than the others? in EVE Communication Center

    Solecist Project wrote:
    Wow what an awesome contribution!

    Thank you! ^_^

    I'm still waiting for Shae to post about her findings ...
    ... I am guilty of not doing it myself.



    We aim to please :D

    Solecist Project wrote:

    This part ...

    Quote:
    For kicks, we also did a back of the envelop stat of cas corp chat, and have counted the proportion of people who speak at least twice, and out of 61128 characters saying something in corp, 15587 speak only once, and we have a 42% "engagement" rate, as described in the pvp calculus above.


    ... is super-interesting.

    15.587 only speak once.

    how often is that a greeting followed by silence?
    Is there any way for me to access these logs so i can go through them myself?


    Unfortunately not. We are super serious about the privacy thing, having a somewhat large number of women and other people susceptible to being harassed by the less savoury segment of the Internet population, and we have asked people with a LOT of chat logs (because they are boosting mining fleets or just generally online all the time) to run the thing on their own computers and provide a dataset back.

    From personal experience, hello almost never gets unanswered. The only times I can remember people speaking only once and disappearing fall into two categories:
    - the answerless statement/question, eg "hello, are there people who want to join corp XXX", which gets shouted down fairly quickly as recruitment isn't something that is done in NPC corp chat, or "hey, you're a girl, wanna meet?"
    - the insecure hit and run, eg "No you're wrong, NPC corp players know nothing about fleet warfare, you guys should train up for ship XXX it's the best" and then never follow up on the matter.

    I'm fairly sure that if you roll an alt in CAS and ask a couple of 1d or 2d old who speak in corp to share their opinion about the quality of advice/discussion in CAS, you'll get a very wide gamut of answers. Since we can't police the chat any other way but by participating, or blocking, it's *very* random. :D

    But it is my opinion that the overall quality is good, because it's a snowball effect: a new player gets helped by random people in CAS corp chat, and then tends to spread the help later on.

  • Does CAS have a higher retention rate than the others? in EVE Communication Center

    (sorry, I like to split posts so that it's easier to respond to specific points)

    I've been in CAS for a while. Some of our veterans are in CAS since the inception of the game. In the past couple of years, because I'm a sucker and believe in the ideal, I found myself in charge of organizing stuff.

    That was the disclaimer for the "you're biased" strawman argument. Yes I am.

    Something you have to remember about CAS, but also every other NPC corp, is that we have no power of coercion or selection. If one of our members stirs trouble or spout nonsense, we have no way of expelling them.

    As a group, we kind of decided to embrace the whole anarchy thing from the get go. No one is in charge but the person who decides to organize an event, a group, or a discussion. And even then, there are limitations to the power that person holds.

    For instance a CCD (newcomer pew pew in space), we have stashed hundreds of replacement ships in a dozen stations. That costs ISK. That takes time to move these things around. And that comes on top of taking 60 new people and trying to get them to learn fleet things like moving together and shooting at one particular target rather than the closest to them. ASK any other NPSI group how hard it is.

    All of this is currently managed by a handful of people, and financed by donations. We do NOT have an alliance tax that finances those things. Everything is volunteered. And yet, 8 years later, we still get 60-100 people in those events.

    Sure, it's not huge compared to some big space battles, but convincing new people every month to trust us to show them a decent time AND teach them the ropes of null sec ain't no small endeavor.

    Now, I saw posts outlining the fact that we encourage people not to leave CAS, and that we have no idea how the game is "really" played because we never left the shelter of the NPC corp.

    - To the first point, this is not true. Most people who believe in the CAS ideal will stay in the corp, that's for sure. You'll see in many people's bios that they aren't looking for recruitment. But it's a side effect of our unofficial motto that we try to make a reality:

    try before you buy.

    We provide as many insights as we can relevant to all the activities you can do in EVE. That's it, no more, no less.

    New players ask me all the time why I didn't leave CAS. My answer is simple:
    First you find people you like flying with and then (and ONLY then), you join their group. Turns out, the people I like flying with are in CAS. But that doesn't mean player corps can't be more suited to other people.
    I actually believe a small fraction should (and will) stay in CAS: the people who enjoy having no strings attached whatsoever and can occupy themselves when no content is provided. For people who want or need structure and clearly defined objectives, player corps is the way to go.
    But in order to want or need structure and defined objectives, you need to have at least an idea that *this* structure and *these* objectives are compatible with how you get enjoyment. And I believe that's what we try to do... provide a basis to make you EVE choices knowingly.

    - Since we're on the topic of player corps, let's address the second point. As someone said, we do have an alliance, which a player corp can join. It's fairly rudderless and exists solely for the purpose of flying in the AT, but if a new player and 4 of their friends want to try out banding together in a corp with the same kind of anarchistic view, they can. We do not impose ANYTHING on them. Sure, if one corp gets wardecced, we all get wardecced, but that's the cost of doing business. Besides, most of the time, when those corps get serious about their corp business, they tend to leave the alliance.

    However, CAS holds a LOT of alts (and spais), who sometimes get dragged in a discussion and provide their input on what corp life in a "real" alliance is like. Some of our alumni who "went up in the world" are still on friendly terms with us (even if they kill our newblets) and will happily share their experiences.

    It's not a matter of what's the "right" way of playing eve, because I don't think there is one. It's about providing a way for people to experience a lot of things before they commit to something they might regret a few days/weeks later. Going toe to toe with big alliances with a group of people who mine, explore, trade 99% of their time during a 10h event, and then decide if that's something they want to do more, THAT's what we are about. Could we do it better? probably. Could we do it outside of an NPC corp? no. By the time we get to the players who have already joined 3 corps and are looking for something new, most of the time they have a restrictive idea of what the "right" way of playing eve is.

  • Does CAS have a higher retention rate than the others? in EVE Communication Center

    Sorry, I'm a bit late to the party, but we did grok some numbers with the data that is available to us. Of course, we're no CCP Quant, and it's limited but here's the basis for the back of the envelope calculus:

    - we do major pvp events every 6 weeks or so, and daily pvp events that aren't "organized". The killboard is fed by the players, not any API key (mostly)
    - we "monitor" the channels by looking retroactively at the logs

    Keep that in mind when I unfold the reasoning, because it means we have holes in our coverage and therefore in our data.

    - over the last 8 years of CAS Combat Day, our main event, we've had 5995 unique pilots participating (as of May 2016)
    - of these 5995 pilots, I look through the EVE API which of them have joined a player corp after a kill they participated in on our killboard (active choice, not our "responsibility" anymore ;) )
    - of these 5995 pilots, I look through zkill who had a kill or a loss at least 12 weeks after a participation in a kill with us (still active and in space 12 weeks later)
    - of these 5995 pilots, I look through people who are connected 23/7's logs to see if they have spoken in CAS corp chat at least 12 weeks after a kill with us

    and the number of pilots who, based on those criteria, were still active 12 weeks after an event with us is 43%.

    Now remember, this is highly PvP focused, and we have TONS of players who lurk in CAS corp chat and do exclusively mining, incursions, etc, with our relevant CAS SIGs.

    For kicks, we also did a back of the envelop stat of cas corp chat, and have counted the proportion of people who speak at least twice, and out of 61128 characters saying something in corp, 15587 speak only once, and we have a 42% "engagement" rate, as described in the pvp calculus above.

    Of course, we realize the data is probably heavily biased (we miss people who never say a word in corp chat, for instance), but if they do say something in corp, in almost half the case they are still in the game 12 weeks later in a verifiable manner.

  • [Citadels] Changing NPC taxes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Lucas Kell wrote:
    Niko Zino wrote:
    You are quite right, obviously. I guess I do have a knee-jerk reaction to people who comment without knowledge on the supposed validity of my opinions. I don't take it kindly when my baker gives me internet advice, and that's probably a bit stupid of me, too.
    Roll Yes, it's no wonder arguments circulate when you are absolutely positive you are right, positive you have more knowledge than the other party and sling personal attacks around when you don't get your own way. Ed: and amusingly you prove yourself wrong, which is the funniest part.

    Niko Zino wrote:
    I just wish CCP would provide a summary of why they think some sort of a sliding scale that wouldn't impact people who do what I do too much, or more accurately don't impact the 'education' I'm providing, or something unrelated to cost, like JC timer reductions, for instance.
    Here's the crux of it. You don't want change to impact you. Quite honestly, if you can't afford to sling a rookie 900k isk you probably shouldn't be giving them advice. You won't even put in basic effort to adapt, and you think you're the right person to guide a rookie in how to play EVE? It's laughable. Adapt of die fella.


    You're being stupidely argumentative again. There should be a tax on posting on forums, we'd see the volume decrease... Oh wait, probably not, because ISK (or really money) isn't an issue to anyone, right? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    No it will not affect my ISK making. Not one bit. In any way, shape or form. It will impact what I do for the community, though, which, again, does not benefit me at all. The pilots I take on roams can't JOIN CAS, because we are a starter corp. They will, however, join other organization for some pew pew after they are convinced it's a fun activity. My gameplay of risking my own ships to kill some other players will not be affected, I'll have fun even solo.

    I jump clone once a month, and that's for picking up the newbies in HS. I don't do that, I have no JC cost involved. And even if I do, I make way enough ISK to pay for ships, so yes, 900k doesn't bother me in the least.

    It will impact the participation, you can bet your posting rights on that.

  • [Citadels] Changing NPC taxes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Rob Kaichin wrote:
    Guys, you're literally going in circles.


    You are quite right, obviously. I guess I do have a knee-jerk reaction to people who comment without knowledge on the supposed validity of my opinions. I don't take it kindly when my baker gives me internet advice, and that's probably a bit stupid of me, too.

    Thanks for trying to moderate this as best as you can. I just wish CCP would provide a summary of why they think some sort of a sliding scale that wouldn't impact people who do what I do too much, or more accurately don't impact the 'education' I'm providing, or something unrelated to cost, like JC timer reductions, for instance.

  • [Citadels] Changing NPC taxes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Lucas Kell wrote:
    Edit: inb4 even more personal attacks. All that shows is your argument is weak. Shall I take my victory lap now?


    Be my guest. As long as you want. You'll end up being all alone on this track and won't be able to gloat over anyone of your impressive achievements. But hey, kudos to you, once more, for being on top of a pile of 1.

    As long as you refuse to even try debating all those things with the people that I interact with every day, you will miss the point. But hey, it doesn't impact you, so you win! Awesome, and congrats! No one is trying to take that away from you.

    Which, to be honest, doesn't matter to me one bit. I don't have to convince you, because it's impossible. I have to convince people who came on the heels of 'This is Eve' and other theatrical trailers and are sorely disappointed they are being relegated to all day ratting and all day mining, because they think it's the only thing they can do.

    Among all the posters here, you are among the ones that stands the least to loose. You don't gain much, either, maybe, but that's the extent of it. You can spout 4000 words a minute, it won't change a goddamn thing : your opinion is irrelevant, because you have no stake.

  • [Citadels] Changing NPC taxes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Lucas Kell wrote:
    OK, roll a new character and try ice mining, capital ship building or sov ownership for free. Good luck! Hell, you give people the ships they need to PvP, so even that's not no cost that's just the cost offset to someone else.

    Read, I also didn't say "become proficient or good at a specific gameplay", you can't expect to just run around and try everything for free either. That is not what EVE is.


    Again, bullshit. These activities aren't basic, but considered 'end game'.

    So you are of the opinion that only people who know what they are doing should sell their basic ore on the market, given that it falls under the same category as 'mining', or should not attempt to build t1 frigs, seeing that it's the same roughly as building caps, or pvp, since it's the basis of sov warfare? Not be good at it, not 'win' at it, just try and feel like they have enough information about it to decide if they want to pursue, or not.

    I contend that in order to have people competing and competitive in these high end activities, they will have to have tried somewhat risk-free the basic variants and found it palatable.

    Oh and by the way, all these basic things? part of the career missions and opportunities... Should be encouraged, imho, rather than 'here's all you can do, please pay to participate, whatever your level of proficiency'

    EDIT:
    inb4 stupideries

    Now, risk free doesn't mean highly profitable. Risk free for little to no gain, so that you are tempted to risk more for more gain, obviously. But definitely not pay-to-loose.

  • [Citadels] Changing NPC taxes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Lucas Kell wrote:
    How? All it goes against is the idea that anyone become anything for no cost, which is simply not a part of EVE and hopefully never will be.


    Again, read. I didn't say become proficient or good at a specific gameplay, which takes effort and dedication, and, yes, resources.

    I said try and be allowed to be bad at it without feeling bad about it.

  • [Citadels] Changing NPC taxes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Niko Zino wrote:
    Drago Shouna wrote:
    Maybe corps like yours will have to expand on the srp, and think about a crp.. I donate to Mike Azariah and the Magic Bus Tour so try shouting out for a few donations?


    What corp? I'm CAS (starter NPC corp), partly because that's the only way we can interact with actual newbies before they start their 'let's try that corp, and that corp, and that corp, oh damn, I'll make my own' danse.

    Donating to us is called 'taxes', not that I will ever see the color of it ;)


    That being said, yes, sure. But what we do is help players experiment with other aspects of the game. We don't benefit from it. If it becomes too onerous or too little fun to do what we do, most non aligned newbie oriented people will simply stop doing it.

    I just think this proposal goes against the 'anyone can become anything' cred. What it encourages is choosing a path and sticking to it, factoring the extra costs in your expenses to further entrench you.

    Nothing more, nothing less.

  • [Citadels] Changing NPC taxes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Drago Shouna wrote:
    Maybe corps like yours will have to expand on the srp, and think about a crp.. I donate to Mike Azariah and the Magic Bus Tour so try shouting out for a few donations?


    What corp? I'm CAS (starter NPC corp), partly because that's the only way we can interact with actual newbies before they start their 'let's try that corp, and that corp, and that corp, oh damn, I'll make my own' danse.

    Donating to us is called 'taxes', not that I will ever see the color of it ;)

  • [Citadels] Changing NPC taxes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Lucas Kell wrote:
    More uninformed stuff, because apparently, recognizing someone else's expertise on a topic you know nothing about is a sin.


    I am post #7 of that thread, so let's put aside the question of anteriority as it appears you cherry pick what you read to fuel your... ego? I'm going to assume it's that rather than anything else, because I quite frankly don't see anything but 'you are wrong, and I am right' in what you say.

    Tell you what, you win at posting volume, ok? Congratulations *\o/*

    Now to the actual meat of the argument:

    The clone, as of now, is a pay once, use whenever mechanic. Like ships, like citadels, even. Sure, you can have badly fitted ships, and unfueled citadels that wont get you the optimal result you'd like to have those things for, but you have paid for something that you can use when the time comes. I'm assuming citadels will still have the regeneration and reinforcement timers even unfueled here, but I'm not sure of myself.

    With the proposed jump clone fee for each jump, we switch to something like a subscription+rental model. You have access to it, but you can't use it unless you pay. The alternative being you pay big bucks, and a recurring fee on top of it, so that your users don't have to pay.

    Now let's take the vast majority of newbie/casual pvpers:
    The do their thing in their corner, preferably avoiding getting ganked, and have fun in their own way. That's key, they are playing the game they want to play, or think they do.
    Here comes little me : "Hey, have you ever tried pvp? it's actually a lot of fun to be actively fighting, win or loose, rather than forever be on the receiving end of l33t HS warriors. Come check it out, we'll give you ships, and you can continue on till our FC calls it quits"
    That newbro (to pvp) eyes me suspiciously and asks why the hell he should follow me and loose ships with me rather than carry on his routine that brings him sufficient fun, thank you very much.
    To viz, my only argument is "well, it's a different way to play the game, and until you know if you actually enjoy it or not, it won't cost you anything that you're not willing to risk, so why not?"
    So he does. He flies with me, gets on some dank kills, has some fun, but is still unconvinced. To that I can currently tell him "you know what? leave your clone here, come back whenever you want, we are always knee deep in shenanigans, make your own opinion"
    And he does. He'll sometimes spend a day or two in null with us, and form his opinion on random samplings, not on specifically tailored events.

    With that jump tax? he won't do it. Not because it's too expensive, but because it's a toll booth on a road he isn't sure he actually wants to take.

    Simple as that.

    Can we afford to have a fund for the special events? sure. We'll pay for every casual and truly new pvpers. The rest of the time? I'm sure as hell not managing creating content on a daily basis for them AS WELL AS micromanaging receipts for 2d vacations.

    Those people will be lost to the pool of pvpers out there, whether they fly with me or against me. I think that's a shame.

  • [Citadels] Changing NPC taxes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Lucas Kell wrote:
    Meaningless stuff


    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I feel like I'm arguing with my baby sister when she's convinced she's right, and that repeating the same things over and over and over again is a 'good' point.

    I never said anything about protecting implants, yet you keep hammering that nonsense. And yet, accuse me of using a straw man argument.

    I don't think you know what you are talking about, outside of your own personal experience, and while that makes your opinion on the proposed changes as valid as anyone else's, it doesn't mean you can comment on people with points outside of your experience with any sort of expertise.

    In essence, that's the only thing I've been trying to say on this thread for the past week or so. Changes are coming. And that's both good and bad. I'm limiting myself to comment on the area I know well enough to dare comment on : newbie management.

    I do that day in and day out. Other people from Karmafleet, Pandemic Horde, Redemption Road, and others I'm sorry not to remember from the top of my head, have said the same thing : it's already hard to convince people to take risks, when you give them the ships and they only loose 100k ISK for the creation of a new, blank, clone for that purpose. But once they have done it a few times, they are willing to pay for anything, including shiny losses.

    You make it harder for us to cross that initial bridge, you have less people trying newbro-oriented roams. How many? I don't know. But definitely less. That means more people will stay in the relative risk free environment they chose for themselves because they don't know pvp is fun. Not because they are cheap or because they suck at it. Just because that initial psychological hurdle was never crossed. Those are facts. You will definitely not have more newbros in those roams that what's currently happening.

    Does it matter on the scale of the game? I think it does, you think it doesn't. I'm eagerly awaiting the participation stats from people who do the same thing I do once this tax is passed. Right now we manage to have fleets roughly a hundred strong, with 25% of the participants who have never done any consensual pvp. I'm willing to bet those 25% will become 5%.

    Again, does it matter? Maybe not to you. It does to me and I think it's bad for the game as a whole, as a result.

    I also have opinions of the rest of the proposed changes, but if you look at my first post, I don't pretend to be an expert, I don't make a living out of it, and therefore will not comment.

  • [Citadels] Changing NPC taxes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Lucas Kell wrote:
    Niko Zino wrote:
    Real new players (not spai alts, or cyno alts, or friends of old players who are just starting) don't KNOW how to make ISK, just how to loose ISK. 1M is a lot to them. And it's a psychological barrier to try something new.
    Except it's not. Even the starter career missions give more than that. And the point is that if they are already at a stage where they have a clone, have implants they need to protect and are going to perform an activity that they know in advance is dangerous enough that they need to swap clones, they are obviously not that new.


    Not what? a psychological barrier? Right. Try to find a real newbie and ask him if he wants to spend that kind of money on the right to try something new, and report back with your findings. I'll wait right here, in a starter corp chat, where I'll collect my own stats, and we'll compare, ok?

    I'm not saying it's insurmontable, but it's so convenient to reply as if that's what I said, because then the forum warrior ego soars higher. This is called a straw man argument, for those of you keeping score at home, and while it's a very effective way to dismiss a point under the guise of a neighboring point that was never made, it doesn't make the speaker right.

    TL;DR It's not a question of absolute amounts, it's a question of pay-to-play perception.

    I'm fully aware that we pay a sub or work in game to pay for the game time. Newbros also expect the game to be fully available as long as they pay their access fee, not that everything they will do from here on out will require them to work (a bit, somewhat, or a lot) to get to try basic things outside of their routine.

  • [Citadels] Changing NPC taxes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Lucas Kell wrote:
    That would only affect vets mains. Utility alts would be lower SP. The idea isn't to cripple older players, it's to give a token amount of isk for swapping around clones. 900k is basically free, and if a newbie is struggling to get that together I'd have to ask where they got the cash for the implants they are so desperate to protect and what ship they are going to go flying dangerously, since pretty much everything would fall under the the rule "don't fly what you can't afford to lose" if you can't even afford 900k.


    That party line is stupid and getting old.

    Jump clones, for newcomers, isn't about protecting +5s. That wherewithal is for long term HS missionners or not-so-young pvp people.

    If you haven't interacted with a real 1d old in a while, please don't show your ignorance as to what they expect or know from the game. Newbies will fly ships they can't afford to loose. The will rush to battleships then loose them because lowsec is like highsec but with fewer people, right?

    Real new players (not spai alts, or cyno alts, or friends of old players who are just starting) don't KNOW how to make ISK, just how to loose ISK. 1M is a lot to them. And it's a psychological barrier to try something new.

    For us old players who don't navelgaze and actually spend a lot of time trying to get those new players to stay in the game, that jump tax is either going to be something that will pidgeonhole new players into mining and nothing else (over simplification, but you get the drift), or mean a lot more ISK in the funds to get them to even try pvp. "Come and have fun with the game" = 3x the amount of a fully fitted frig per player we manage to convince to come on a roam for the first time + a lot of work to police/manage the funds to avoid abuse + the SRP, instead of just the last part.

    Either way it's a burden for people who are trying to keep new people in, to actually PLAY the game you guys are taking for granted.

  • [Citadels] Changing NPC taxes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Anhenka wrote:
    You should really stop looking at changes in terms of how it effects just you, and to to how things effect the game as a whole. Let's take that removal of meta 0 and nerfing of modules to 50% refine and see some of the things that happened.


    I must say this is good advice... Will people who know what they are doing or have enough buffer be able to adapt? hell yea.

    Will it be easier or harder for newcomers to compete/use the proposed changes? I look at all the feedback here and I say clearly 'harder'.

    Now, that, in and of itself isn't necessarily a bad thing. Eve is notorious for having a steep learning curve. Newcomers WILL loose a lot of money, time, and ships, learning the ropes.

    My biggest fear is that it's the straw that break the camel's back: some areas will take so much effort (insert a metric here if you want) to break into that newcomers won't attempt it, or will attempt it less. It leads to stagnation, which, in my opinion is a bad thing.

    It's my opinion, nothing more, nothing less, but as an entity, CAS has more than enough experience dealing with the newbies before they get into player corps to at least be granted the benefit of the doubt when we say that this may be a long-term bad idea.

  • [Citadels] Changing NPC taxes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Frostys Virpio wrote:
    Niko Zino wrote:
    Frostys Virpio wrote:
    Oh well, guess people won't come to fight in null over 2 mill for a back and forth jump...


    What's in it for them? Don't you hand ships out for your deployments anyways (or have SRP which is basically the same thing)?
    So right now, they'll join because why not. Then you'll have to convince them, by narrative or incentive.

    Again, exact monetary amount aside, I think it's a shame to have to convince people to pay so that they can have fun with what you and I do to have fun. Sounds too much like work, not enough like a game.


    The fun of it? It's a game after all. If you don't have fun doing it, you won't do it even for free. If you like it, 2mill won't prevent you from doing it.

    If you won't try it because of 2 mill? I will not feel sorry for you.


    This is pointless. Everytime I argue money - because noobs are my crowd, and 2M can be considered a lot of monies for them, or for me if I have to pay the fee for 100 pilots on the game time I use for myself rather than them -, someone argues psychology (but paying 2mil to have fun is NOTHING!!!), and every time I argue psychology - and I think that the effect is psychological, not so much monetary -, someone will argue money (if you feel bad about spending 2M, suck it up).

    Either way, good job, you made a point! check that off your bucket list.

    It still doesn't address the issue that for newbie oriented groups, it's less fun and more work. And if you don't want people trying to vary their eve life, and in my particular case don't want them as fresh blood for YOUR pvp, there is something wrong with the way you look at things, imo.

  • [Citadels] Changing NPC taxes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Frostys Virpio wrote:
    Oh well, guess people won't come to fight in null over 2 mill for a back and forth jump...


    What's in it for them? Don't you hand ships out for your deployments anyways (or have SRP which is basically the same thing)?
    So right now, they'll join because why not. Then you'll have to convince them, by narrative or incentive.

    Again, exact monetary amount aside, I think it's a shame to have to convince people to pay so that they can have fun with what you and I do to have fun. Sounds too much like work, not enough like a game.

  • [Citadels] Changing NPC taxes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    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.

Forum Signature

CAS, the NPC Corp that Does Stuff™