That’s more of a side effect, really. If the ecosystem itself is healthy, the PvP would naturally be more meaningful.
1 Like
We have that now.
It’s called Quantum Cores.
You’re approaching this from the wrong angle. There is no way of getting people to defend their stuff if they don’t want to do that. The illusion of an intact ego is more important to them than the cost involved.
I believe it is matter of core price. If it will cost enough there will be incentive to hire mercs, even if owner don’t want to fight himself.
1 Like
You’re right, of course.
I don’t include Mercs into these kind of conversations …
… because hiring those does not equate to “fighting back”.
QCs only serve to reduce the structure spam …
… (gives the structures more “meaning”, I guess) …
… and to make wardeccers a bit more happy for whatever reason.
The problem is that with the current nature of high-sec warfare (mass-scale blanket wars), hiring mercenaries starts off in the multiple billions (because no one is going to try to fight off a dozen BF or HD Trig battleships for 500 million ISK), which is almost always more than the cost of an entry-level structure and gear.
Mercenary work is not going to be viable until this is reworked so that everything is to-scale.
1 Like
But this is not question of taxes for non-wardeccable corps. It is more about refining wardecs themselves.
Sol is as usual getting things completely wrong, somehow blaming the victims for being weak and imagining that attackers are strong because hey, 100 of us can beat 20 of you so we’re great and awesome and you’re weak scum who deserves to die!
It’s exactly as Destiny said (correctly, for once):
PvP in EVE is asymmetric. There is literally no balancing mechanism. In general, PvPers attack targets they are fairly sure they can beat, and nobody can defend something 23/7 without having Nullbloc level resources.
No matter what you have to defend, there will always be someone out there who can take it from you as soon as they decide to do so. There is no workable defense for most entities in the game. Thus, as we have already found, the common option is “If I’m attacked by something I can’t defend against, just stop playing until they go away. Then either decide to rebuild, or have nothing attackable, or quit playing.”
It’s low quality and sloppy game design, and it leads to the kind of low quality and sloppy PvP we have in EVE. Without something to control “scope of engagement” so that entities have a reasonable chance against attacks, EVE is just going to be a vicious cycle of cherry-picking attackers consuming weak targets until there’s too few players left for a viable game.
You’re just an asshole who picks and chooses based on whatever fits your carebear narrative. 
Incorrect. As someone who recruits a lot of new players i get tons of mails from these players saying that they joined a corp but they gain nothing from it and are now looking for a better corp. Almost in all cases the reason for them joining a bad corporation has been that they are unable to difference a bad corporation from a good one.
Tax evasion is mainly for older players, many new players do not even understand how the tax is applied and if there even is such a thing as a tax.
The bottomline issue here is what we can call a bad corporation and what we can call a good corporation. How do you measure one? How can you trust that the statistics you get are true without joining each corporation yourself and spending a few weeks in them? There simply isn’t.
So until we can actually have a better way of even getting an slight idea about what corporations are “bad” then it is pointless to try to fix the “bad” corporations with any changes to any corps be it player or NPC.
So in other words you want to put the bill and risk directly on the players wallet instead of the corporations wallet. I think this is upside down, a line worker should not have to worry about management cost of the higher ups. This is why a corporation leadership role is an actual role in this game.
High costs should always be a group effort like titans were back in the time. It should then require the leadership to take the needed actions to secure services for their members and require what they think they need from their members to secure the assets.
The way they do this doesn’t matter as it will create diversity. Some like to hire mercs, some like to defend themselves and some want to take the chances of no defense and their ■■■■ blown up. No point to try to force everyone into one mold.
I don’t see how. Taxes would be collected based on what corporation you’re in, so risk would still be handled collectively by the corporation. It’s not like some members would get taxed, and some wouldn’t; everyone in a war eligible/ineligible corporation would be untaxed/taxed (respectively) equally.
All of this would still be equally possible under the new system.
I merely mentioned the effect of NPC tax applied to war ineligible corps to weed out bad corporations that use tax evasion as a way to recruit newbies, and said it is another reason to add the NPC tax to these corps.
Not the main reason, which is a more fair risk vs reward system.
As such, saying that we need to postpone adding the NPC tax to these corps just because you’re unable to tell good corps from bad ones is kind of unrelated.
Well lets say we did add npc tax on non war eligible corporations. What prevents people from abusing no tax while they have no wars just like now and as soon as the war hits they either swap corps for the duration of the war like people used to do before war changes. Or dropping the war by making your corp not to be eligible by wars as soon as the war hits the corp and then again going war eligible after 24 hours.
As long as there are easy workarounds to still avoid taxation it feels waste of dev hours to add such a thing.
Then the system works. They’ll be paying the taxes while they’re in their war-ineligible state.
How would they do that?
1 Like
Does POS count for war-eligibility? They can be anchored and un-anchored pretty fast.
I thought it was just Upwell and POCO, but this says that yes, POSes count:
Hardly anyone uses them these days anyway.
The only way to be war-ineligible right now is to not have any structures. So outside of POS-only usage (which has no working modules aside from defensive ones), it’s impossible to become war-ineligible on short notice.
Multiple ways. Easiest way is to abuse poco gantry. Drop gantry in space but do not anchor → corp is eligible for war. If war hits you you scoop it. This method also makes the actual war only last for the same duration it tok from the wardec and when you scoop it up. So if you scoop the ganry within 1 minute the war will last 1 minute and instantly end. Yeah this is not an exploit regarding CCP.
Second more not so exploitish way is to actually anchor the poco. Only thin it must be outside HS so when war hits you you simply transfer the poco to a new corp. Corp becomes not eligible for wars and war drop. After 24h transfer the poco back over. Or use a citadel if you do not want to use pocos, you can always transfer structures while at war while they are outside HS.
Both ways are instant so still easier than a POS which you have to wait an astonishing 30 minutes to come down 
Edit: oh and i forgot the alliance way. Simply dont hold any structures under your corp and if war hits drop the alliance. Not as handy as war on alliance remains up but still a way to instantly drop out and if you want to get back to the original state, have multiple holding alliances to join. Taxed duration in this case also 24 hours.
Not if the corporation they dodge to is actually also eligible for wars. If that gets hit they hop to a new one. We used to do this back in the day for new players with around 10 holding corps for purely war dodging. For them it is just a few clicks of a button and they are back again in tax heaven.
Until belonging to a corporation actually has any real meaning that are hard coded to the game then there is no way around this.
So I get what you mean with these nickel-and-diming semi-exploits about evading wars, but remember that I’m not looking at modifying the system so heavily through taxes in a vacuum. This can and should be accompanied by other changes, such as the restructuring of the war fee formula, and the closing of various loopholes like this. Also, I’m not entirely sure how well some of these actually work.
Why would someone do this? Wouldn’t it be possible for anyone to simply come along and scoop the gantry because it’s not anchored? Is it even usable in an unanchored state?
Also, I don’t think you can transfer structures during a war.
The war will follow you if you drop the alliance, for the remaining amount of time that it initially had left. It would in effect be treated as its own separate war. Now, if you become war-ineligible when you drop the alliance, that’s fine, but then you’ll start paying the tax.
But that’s literally what the taxes would solve. With these taxes, there would be no more tax havens.
Currently there is no need for anyone to do this but its a valid way of avoiding the wars if these NPC taxes would be applied on player corporations. You can drop the gantry anywhere in space in a safespot (doesn’t need to bee at a planet) so chances are rather small that someone will probe it down and scoop it.
The key part in here is that because people can easily do something like this then why would they not do it when it provides them great benefits against other corporations?
All of the methods i described work perfectly as we have used them in the past.
You can transfer any structures outside high sec space during war. If not then null alliances would never be able to move around their stuff to new owners as they almost always have wars on them.
Im not sure if you understood the reply right, this would be a exact revert to the pre war changes where people hop from corp to corp to avoid wars and still enjoy the no tax of the supposed changes as each corp they hop to are also eligible to wars (just like pre changes).