It’s not bad, isk sink wise. In fact, Asset Safety’s only redeeming feature is that it sinks isk from the game every time someone pays to pull stuff out. It is however something of an issue when it comes to breeding risk aversion, entitlement and trying to go for asset denial/destruction among your enemies.
It makes a lot of warfare kind of bloody pointless at this point. Grind an entire region’s worth of structures and hideyholes from the enemy and you haven’t really taken anything from them but what amounts basically to a little insurance premium. “Ah okay, we’re losing. Let’s just pay a token sum and the game’ll move all our crap to safety for us. No effort, no loss.”
The isk sink part is great. Everything else is a drawback to the game.
Jacking up the taxes would about as popular and helpful as adding a resort fee. Unless you really intend to kill the game, or just troll your players and piss them off with mean-spirited programmer BS, it is a dumb idea.
Almost all of my non-HS-NPC-station assets are in a WH citadel and thus not subject to asset safety, but… I actually don’t think asset safety should be removed from nullsec/lowsec (and highsec, I guess) citadels.
I think instead of getting ALL your crap moved, you should only get HALF your crap moved. It should be just like a ship death: loot fairy picks and chooses 50% to drop (or move, in this case) and 50% to obliterate for good. The fee for recovering the 50% remaining can stay as is or be adjusted if need be, but either way… THAT would be incentive to protect your structures or to move your crap out of 'em when they’re definitely going down.
Your final statement on that matter is a bit curious. You’d rather have cities where only the rich can afford to live than a city where the infrastructure is crumbling but the poor haven’t been kicked out onto the streets (yet), eh?
Thanks. Again, I give credit to the standard EVE killmail for the inspiration, though… Loot Fairy RULES OVER ALL in this game, why not asset safety, too.
And it’s not as uber-harsh as going from 100% to 0% asset safety. 50% is a great balance.
It isn’t. It’s a conflict deadener and that’s the only problem with it.
Under old POS setups, if a target neutral to you had a production POS running, there was an incentive to consider attacking them because you might score billions in loot. Under the safety regime, you have to actively HATE someone to attack their structures.
Safety could be fixed if the cost to evacuate items was raised, and the aggressor entity recieved some portion of that fee. Perhaps with a waiver after 365 days so people that long-term unsub don’t return to nothing.
I believe that change really only hurts newer/casual players (The ones who don’t have all the ISK that is floating around). It isn’t going to effect any of the people who actually already have ISK or know how to make ISK. So I just see it as another barrier for a new player to get going. Personally, I would rather see insurance be overhauled so combat becomes an ISK sink. Have “default” insurance be newbro only, remove insurance availability for people killed by CONCORD, maybe have people with terrible security status have to go get insurance in a pirate station instead of a normal station. There are a few options you can do to cause combat to be an ISK sink (Without killing it). I’d say have a multiplier that would go up every time you got an insurance payout that made insurance costs raise, and then slowly go down over time of not losing ships (Similar to how accidents cause your insurance premiums to go up), but I think that might be going to far in order to keep combat attractive.
Nah that discourages PvP and it’ll just be a case of grinding sec/buying tags to mitigate. Value tied to the object needs to be the go, only possible issue is manipulating items to screw people over. For example driving rmt items up and hitting TTT, would be hilarious but mechanics abuse.
Increasing NPC broker’s fee will shift more trade to citadels, and increasing sales tax will increase all prices, and for some items will decrease gains. Increase in trade skills bonuses will compensate above increase a bit, but overall change is game will become more demanding and harder to play.
I understand that you would like to promote players who want to run citadels, and to reduce number of alpha accounts. With all prices going up, ISK will worth less, and therefore you expect more PLEX to be pumped into the game. Fair enough.
What I don’t understand is why you didn’t promote more than one citadel in The Forge before this change? At this point, there is only one citadel TTT in Perimeter, and supporting citadel satellites like the one in Obanen, so it’s obviously monopoly. Once created, monopoly will be hard to eliminate. So, as I see it, it’s not about promoting players who want to run citadels, but to promote only one group.
The other thing I don’t understand is why you’re punishing players who obtain Trade Goods like Sleeper Components that can be only sold with less value per site? My best guess that those players are collateral where everything else than PVP is inferior. Unfortunately, I’m among those players who play this game for everything else than PVP.
Indeed. CCP has no clue about markets or does what you say “but to promote only one group”. The markets in Jita are already suffering, with the tax/fee hike the volume of traded stuff crashed … hope it recovers.
These changes are live on TK since 1st August. It seems there was no announcement in the launcher about this patch being deployed. Devblog was posted and announced in launcher just 2 days earlier but it did not state deployment date and offered discussion here. I think silent patch deployment is an unacceptable practice and CCP should apologise and reimburse all extra fees between patch deployment and and announcement in launcher being published.
I think they just need to rework asset safety and implement the current loot system into it.
Items that would be destroyed just like in a ship kill would not be but instead go to asset safety and items that would drop would just drop on a citadel kill.
Edit: That for all ships and items and everything stored by players on given citadel.
CONCORD doesn’t fight with trigs because it would take away from their other policing and diplomatic efforts, so I guess the lore explanation is that they’re building up income in order to actually get involved?