tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post2000750394374609972..comments2024-02-27T14:44:07.868+01:00Comments on Greedy goblin: License, tax, rentGevlonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07072766785893313616noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-52329497033082418532012-08-17T12:30:37.300+02:002012-08-17T12:30:37.300+02:00I like the idea of paying corp/alliance isk to sup...I like the idea of paying corp/alliance isk to support them in other ways as pvp<br /><br />However some think differently about this: http://inextremis.eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=14340658 <br />This guy was ratting when he was supposed to be in fleet for pvp. To clarify he said he was afk but corp noticed wallet ticks. He also said he needed to rat isk to afford a pvp ship but transferred hundred of millions of isk to his high sec alt account.<br />FCON is a pvp alliance. Not a renter alliance.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-41521901734088823132012-08-17T07:28:39.883+02:002012-08-17T07:28:39.883+02:00ss300Mil : 20% is a bad ratio to consider, as it r...ss300Mil : 20% is a bad ratio to consider, as it requires ~6 hours / week of pure PVE to break even. That's a lot of gaming, and even more pure PVE gaming.<br /><br />If you compare monthly time spent in game @~6 hrs to _minimum_ wage in NATO countries + Japan + Australia + New Zealand, the PLEX equivalent is ~1.2B (same as grinding it out, -300M or 20% tax).<br /><br />Former Soviet countries are at a disadvantage here, provided PLEX is NOT at parity with their GDP.<br /><br />In conclusion, I will never understand nullbears.NPnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-5497960248269626922012-08-17T07:02:56.183+02:002012-08-17T07:02:56.183+02:00@Anonymous
you are wrong there, policing your home...@Anonymous<br />you are wrong there, policing your home system only leads to people showing up to mess with the "police". guruanteed fights = roaming heaven.<br /><br />@Znybar<br />Alliances don't have taxes, corporations do. And i know a hand full that has 20%, but there are other arrangements too. <br /><br />For Example one of the BoB corps used to require 100m per Character by its players, per month. Another one had 20% Tax, and yet another one was completely Communist with taxing 100%Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-32372204442724285872012-08-17T00:55:13.873+02:002012-08-17T00:55:13.873+02:00No 0.0 alliance in eve has 20% tax, that's a r...No 0.0 alliance in eve has 20% tax, that's a ridiculous level. 10% is the usual tax.Znybarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11945612456646410216noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-55480155399049426852012-08-17T00:18:54.843+02:002012-08-17T00:18:54.843+02:00@anonymous 18:47
You don't have to directly p...@anonymous 18:47<br /><br />You don't have to directly provide protection to your licensees but can simply authorize them to find their own from the ranks of those that are blue to you. Obviously you'd have to have a lesser license fee compared to providing protection yourself (and you might have to draw up a model protection contract), but this would have the advantage of giving another direct income source for your motivated PvPers that you don't have to manage. And if someone is dumb enough to not work out their own protection and they get ganked, tough luck to them.<br /><br />Historically, this kind of system has worked before in RL...biggest issue tends to be contract enforcement, but that can be dealt with (does anyone actually have a formal judge position in their corp or alliance? or is that always handled by the leadership?).Dejaranoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-84249119091515053612012-08-16T21:02:26.861+02:002012-08-16T21:02:26.861+02:00If the PvE activity causes the system to be more t...If the PvE activity causes the system to be more tempting then the sov-holding corp may need to restrict the number of licenses.<br /><br />Selling them without restriction might cause buyers to expect the licenses to be bought up until they're just barely worthwhile in terms of risk - and PvE buyers have little appetite for risk.<br /><br />So perhaps an auction format, where N rental spots are auctioned off to the highest bidder would be appropriate. One advantage for the sov-holding corp is that they could get fewer, more dedicated, farmers - easier to keep tabs on / maintain relationship with.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04906677773615232966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-33873487422751323512012-08-16T18:47:37.745+02:002012-08-16T18:47:37.745+02:00The idea is excelent, and it was tried by myself 3...The idea is excelent, and it was tried by myself 3 years ago, in anull-sec alliance.<br /><br />My idea was tho much more complete, comprising BOTH lisence for pvers and payments for pvpers to DEFEND the pvers, otherwise there is NO POINT into just get money without providing protection.<br /><br />In other words, this license system CANNOT work if there is no POLICE.<br /><br />Do you really think someone will PAY a nickle just for ACCES to ratting ground, when hostiles are 1-2 jumps away?<br /><br />No way man, there have to be a PAID "police" force (paid by the licensed corp or the allince from lincence fee) that will CAMP the entry gates of the system/constelation/region so that the ratters can MAKE Isk.<br /><br />So, the idea is good, but doesn't have the incentive of PROTECTION.<br /><br />Imagine a local council selling a licence to a shop BUT not providing police patrols on that area.<br /><br />Not going to work this way.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-80264680287751819772012-08-16T08:20:07.371+02:002012-08-16T08:20:07.371+02:00quite a few alliances have "renter corps"...quite a few alliances have "renter corps" which are corps in which single persons can rent-in.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com