These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Breaking News: Citadel/Plex Contracting.

First post
Author
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#481 - 2017-05-31 12:58:46 UTC
Marek Kanenald wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Snip


It needs to be changed because spending a few seconds and clicks to block someone from access to their assets for 5-20 days is disproportional.


As opposed to the the decade of losing access instantly forever?


Change is bad, re

Also its a stupid argument since citadels are widely more widespread and are used in ways that the old structures never were.


What ways are those?
Cypherous
Liberty Rogues
Aprilon Dynasty
#482 - 2017-05-31 13:00:35 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Inb4 posts attempting to misdirect from the FACT that an Upwell structure owner can incontrovertibly block a players access to their assets for 5-20 days, in just a few seconds and a few clicks.

A delay on Upwell structure access/standings changes is justified.

Players should have an opportunity to wrap up their business before being forcibly locked out of their assets for 5-20 days, just cos structure owner spent a few seconds and a few clicks to force that.

Upwell structure owners get to set vulnerability windows to have time to arrange a reaction.
I dont see why players operating at the structure should not also have some time to wrap up their activities there without instantly being denied access to their assets/interests there for 5-20 days just because the owner spent a few seconds and clicks.


i don't see the issue, it fits perfectly within the trust portion of the game, if you don't trust someone enough to risk losing access to your assets then don't store them there, the same has always applied for conquerable stations and outposts for as long as they have existed, at the end of the day you're not required to dock at a citadel, you're not required to interact with them at all in high sec, which is the only place this has become an "issue"

And i say "issue" because its not actually an issue of mechanics, its a misunderstanding of players who think high sec is or should be "safe", it never has nor ever will be safe, there are however tools and options for you to minimise the risk, now, if you CHOOSE to use a citadel then you accept the risk that goes along with it, much like you accept that undocking means someone MIGHT kill you, i mean, you're entirely free to set up your own citadel in a particular system if you absolutely HAVE to use one, then nobody can block you from docking there, although that can blow it up and deny you access to those same things that someone denied you from accessing before, which can also happen to a 3rd party citadel i might add
Salvos Rhoska
#483 - 2017-05-31 13:19:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
baltec1 wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Snip


It needs to be changed because spending a few seconds and clicks to block someone from access to their assets for 5-20 days is disproportional.


As opposed to the the decade of losing access instantly forever?


Doesnt matter how long that was the case. It no longer is.

Upwell structures and Asset Safety are new, and separate from Outposts.
Asset Safety does not apply to Outpost. Outposts are loot pinatas.
Outposts will soon be phased out entirely.

None of which contradicts that spending a few clicks to lock someone out of their assets for 5-20days is disproportionate, even if you destroy the structure.

In the last decade destroying an Outpost earned you its contents.
This is not true true of Upwell structures where a magic fairy transports them free for you.
Salvos Rhoska
#484 - 2017-05-31 13:26:26 UTC
Cypherous wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


1) As I said, and you agree, a delay does not prevent the scam. Go ahead and make contracts from further away, with tight deadline and with more m3.

2) It just means you have to commit to the staging location in advance, IF you have not already given access to participants (which you did do, right?)


Seeing as citadels can be unanchored and only take 24 hours to deploy and can be purchased for a fairly minor sum and not need any fuel its not really hard to just go pick something 10 jumps from jita and stick a bunch of empty cargo containers in a contract to bump it over the m3 needed to make it a freighter run, sure it takes 7 days to take the old one down but considering the money you already made from it its not really hard to just drop the ISK on a raitaru to deploy somewhere else :P


Yes.

Egro, a delay on standing/access changes in Upwell structures does not prevent scams.
So no problem there.
Cypherous
Liberty Rogues
Aprilon Dynasty
#485 - 2017-05-31 13:27:03 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Snip


It needs to be changed because spending a few seconds and clicks to block someone from access to their assets for 5-20 days is disproportional.


As opposed to the the decade of losing access instantly forever?


Doesnt matter how long that was the case. It no longer is.

Upwell structures and Asset Safety are new, and separate from Outposts.
Asset Safety does not apply to Outpost. Outposts are loot pinatas.
Outposts will soon be phased out entirely.

None of which contradicts that spending a few clicks to lock someone out of their assets for 5-20days is disproportionate, even if you destroy the structure.

In the last decade destroying an Outpost earned you its contents.
This is not true true of Upwell structures where a magic fairy transports them free for you.


Since when can outposts be destroyed? they can be captured but i've not ever heard of one actually being able to be destroyed, citadels are the only station that can be destroyed, the others just change ownership
Salvos Rhoska
#486 - 2017-05-31 13:30:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Cypherous wrote:
i don't see the issue


What issue do you have with a delay on changing standing/access settings in Upwell structures so they can wrap up their assets/interests/business before being forced into a systemic 5-20 day delay due to the structure owner spending a few seconds/clicks to lock them out?
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners
Already Replaced.
#487 - 2017-05-31 13:32:16 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Are people still moaning about a mechanic that has been in the game for years simply because it now affects hisec?



Pretty much.
meh, I have only one thing to say to that.

HTFU


High sec is the place where people can "hide behind NPCs skirts" so to speak. Unlike most of the rest of New Eden, High Sec lets people pretty much avoid the worst aspects of dealing with other people. So those people don't really learn HOW to deal with other people in EVE.

So when CCP embarks upon a plan to put more stuff in the hands of people rather than NPCs (the whole idea behind citadels really), it affects high sec the ways we see on this forum. They can't deal with it because unlike everywhere else, high sec doesn't really make you wary (even paranoid) about things that look too good to be true. This is why you get these massive complaint threads about things that nullsec/low sec/WH players wouldn't even be slightly bothered by.

It shows why High Sec (while being a necessary evil in that you need a stable trading zone) is a horrible place to start people in the game. Leaving high sec for the "real world" of New Eden is as much of a shock as jumping into freezing water.
Salvos Rhoska
#488 - 2017-05-31 13:36:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Cypherous wrote:
? they can be captured but i've not ever heard of one actually being able to be destroyed, citadels are the only station that can be destroyed, the others just change ownership


Wrong term. Captured, with all contents available.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#489 - 2017-05-31 13:38:18 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


Doesnt matter how long that was the case. It no longer is.

Upwell structures and Asset Safety are new, and separate from Outposts.
Asset Safety does not apply to Outpost. Outposts are loot pinatas.
Outposts will soon be phased out entirely.


Turns out you don't know how outposts work.

Salvos Rhoska wrote:

None of which contradicts that spending a few clicks to lock someone out of their assets for 5-20days is disproportionate, even if you destroy the structure.


Again, I have been locked out of a lot of my stuff for upwards of 8 years.

Salvos Rhoska wrote:

In the last decade destroying an Outpost earned you its contents.
This is not true true of Upwell structures where a magic fairy transports them free for you.


Link me a destroyed outpost.
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners
Already Replaced.
#490 - 2017-05-31 13:41:10 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Cypherous wrote:
i don't see the issue


What issue do you have with a delay on changing standing/access settings in Upwell structures?


He can speak for himself. But to me, you don't go changing things when you don't really need to. The game provides enough tools, warnings and information for an aware player to avoid the issue being discussed. Players do it all the time outside high sec in places like Providence and other places with Free ports.

Such a change would negatively affect places like that, people might simply stop having free ports in null and low sec space because they could not shut out people who became suddenly belligerent.

When I lived in Wicked Creek, a citadel owned by our neighbors was a free port. If someone used that citadel as a base to raid into their space or ours, they would simply revoke that guy's docking rights and when he got killed and podded he have to fly out all the way from npc null to get back at us instead of docking in that nearby citadel. A delay would give people like this more time to do what they are doing, which means that non-high sec groups would be even less likely to host Free Ports in their space, and free ports are content generators in lots of ways (especially trade)



TL;DR you don't go changing the game and screwing it up for non-high sec players because a few high sec players are to lazy to read a warning pop up.
Salvos Rhoska
#491 - 2017-05-31 13:50:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
An Upwell structure owner can block access to a players assets in a matter of seconds, thus forcing them to wait 5-20 days to regain access to their assets at another structure.

Meanwhile, the asset owner is SOL with no recourse to act against it.

If he activates Asset Safety, he has to wait 5-20 days to recover assets.

If he destroys the structure, he still has to wait 5-20 days to recover assets.

If the structure is unanchored, he still has to wait 5-20 days to recover assets.

Its 5-20 days no matter how you cut it.

And all this, just cos the Upwell structure owner spent a few seconds/clicks.
That is disproportionate.
Few seconds vs 5-20 days.



A delay in access/standing changes is justified to allow the player to wrap up their interests there, just the same as the Upwell structure owner has time to react to attacks during vulnerability window .

Quid pro quo.

Structure owner gets time to react to action against them, so too should players operating with the structure.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#492 - 2017-05-31 13:54:27 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
An Upwell structure owner can block access to a players assets in a matter of seconds, thus forcing them to wait 5-20 days to regain access to their assets at another structure.

Meanwhile, the asset owner is SOL with no recourse to act against it.

If he activates Asset Safety, he has to wait 5-20 days to recover assets.

If he destroys the structure, he still has to wait 5-20 days to recover assets.

If the structure is unanchored, he still has to wait 5-20 days to recover assets.

Its 5-20 days no matter how you cut it.

And all this, just cos the Upwell structure owner spent a few seconds/clicks.
That is disproportionate.
Few seconds vs 5-20 days.



A delay in access/standing changes is justified to allow the player to wrap up their interests there, just the same as the Upwell structure owner has time to react to attacks during vulnerability window .

Quid pro quo.

Structure owner gets time to react to action against them, so too should players operating with the structure.


It's not justified at all. The only reason you want to change this is because you cannot be bothered to look at the contract information or do basic background checks on the issuer before clicking the accept button. That does not justify ******* over the likes of providence.
Salvos Rhoska
#493 - 2017-05-31 14:06:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
baltec1 wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
An Upwell structure owner can block access to a players assets in a matter of seconds, thus forcing them to wait 5-20 days to regain access to their assets at another structure.

Meanwhile, the asset owner is SOL with no recourse to act against it.

If he activates Asset Safety, he has to wait 5-20 days to recover assets.

If he destroys the structure, he still has to wait 5-20 days to recover assets.

If the structure is unanchored, he still has to wait 5-20 days to recover assets.

Its 5-20 days no matter how you cut it.

And all this, just cos the Upwell structure owner spent a few seconds/clicks.
That is disproportionate.
Few seconds vs 5-20 days.



A delay in access/standing changes is justified to allow the player to wrap up their interests there, just the same as the Upwell structure owner has time to react to attacks during vulnerability window .

Quid pro quo.

Structure owner gets time to react to action against them, so too should players operating with the structure.


It's not justified at all. The only reason you want to change this is because you cannot be bothered to look at the contract information or do basic background checks on the issuer before clicking the accept button. That does not justify ******* over the likes of providence.


1) "You"
I dont haul courier contracts. This has nothing to do with me personally.
I suggested improving the Contract spreadsheet UI with two columns for pickup/destination structure type, which you have dishonestly, repeatedly, ignored.

2) The scam itself is fine, as Ive said over and over and over and over.
A delay on access/standing does not defunct the scam.
Send them from further, with tighter deadline and more m3.

3) None of which is relevant to the discrepancy of an Upwell structure owner spending a few seconds/clicks to FORCE a 5-20 day wait to access assets on any player there. That is fked.

No matter what that player does, from activating Asset Safety, to destroying the structure, to the owner unanchoring, changes that its still a 5-20 day delay to access their own assets.

Structure owner spends a few seconds/clicks, player receives 5-20 day lockout of their assets, no matter what they do.

That doesnt make sense. Few seconds of action by owner vs 5-20 days for random player is whacked.

Just as structure owners have time to react due to vulnerability windows, so too should players operating with the structure have time to react to a lockout.



Outposts and Upwell structures are very different.
Not least of all due to Asset Safety.
Cypherous
Liberty Rogues
Aprilon Dynasty
#494 - 2017-05-31 14:21:19 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Cypherous wrote:
i don't see the issue


What issue do you have with a delay on changing standing/access settings in Upwell structures so they can wrap up their assets/interests/business before being forced into a systemic 5-20 day delay due to the structure owner spending a few seconds/clicks to lock them out?


The issue i have is that its complicating mechanics that don't really need complicating, if i bar you from my place of business i expect you to leave immediately, not to loiter trying to wrap up your business, private property is private property and should a person choose to revoke your ability to access it that should be instant, this isn't something that needs fixing due to it not being "broken" to begin with, there are numerous warnings, this is EVE not hello kitty online, your choices have consequences
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#495 - 2017-05-31 14:23:34 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


1) "You"
I dont haul courier contracts. This has nothing to do with me.


Its your idea.

Salvos Rhoska wrote:

2) The scam itself is fine, as Ive said over and over and over and over.
Nor does a delay on access/standing defunct the scam.
Send them from further, with tighter deadline and more m3.


If the scam is fine and this does nothing to it then that's another reason to not do it.

Salvos Rhoska wrote:

3) None of which is relevant to the discrepancy of an Upwell structure owner spending a few seconds/clicks to FORCE a 5-20 day wait to access assets on any player there. That is fked.


No that makes perfect sense and was one of the things most of the people who own one wanted.

Salvos Rhoska wrote:

No matter what that player does, from activating Asset Safety, to destroying the structure, to the owner unanchoring, changes that its still a 5-20 day delay to access their own assets.

Structure owner spends a few seconds/clicks, player receives 5-20 lockout of their assets no matter what they do.

That doesnt make sense. Few seconds of action by owner vs 5-20 days for random player is whacked.


It makes perfect sense, same as how locking people out forever made sense for outposts. The last thing you want is to be forced to watch someone who has just stolen the corps fleet hanger making off with the goods while the block is counting down. Or someone who just wiped a mining fleet docking to get his stuff out of your station before the ban happens.

Salvos Rhoska
#496 - 2017-05-31 14:26:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Cypherous wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Cypherous wrote:
i don't see the issue


What issue do you have with a delay on changing standing/access settings in Upwell structures so they can wrap up their assets/interests/business before being forced into a systemic 5-20 day delay due to the structure owner spending a few seconds/clicks to lock them out?


The issue i have is that its complicating mechanics that don't really need complicating, if i bar you from my place of business i expect you to leave immediately, not to loiter trying to wrap up your business, private property is private property and should a person choose to revoke your ability to access it that should be instant, this isn't something that needs fixing due to it not being "broken" to begin with, there are numerous warnings, this is EVE not hello kitty online, your choices have consequences


If you expect to remove someone from your place of business immediately, they are also entitled to taking their property with them without waiting 5-20 days to pick it up at some random point. Its their property, not yours. You have autonomy over the structure, but not their property within it.

The discrepancy here, is in it taking a few seconds/clicks to FORCE the player to lose access to their assets for 5-20 days, no matter what they do.

Its too easy and too immediate (a matter of seconds) compared for the repercussions for another players assets being withheld from them for 5-20 days.
Cypherous
Liberty Rogues
Aprilon Dynasty
#497 - 2017-05-31 14:38:41 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Cypherous wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Cypherous wrote:
i don't see the issue


What issue do you have with a delay on changing standing/access settings in Upwell structures so they can wrap up their assets/interests/business before being forced into a systemic 5-20 day delay due to the structure owner spending a few seconds/clicks to lock them out?


The issue i have is that its complicating mechanics that don't really need complicating, if i bar you from my place of business i expect you to leave immediately, not to loiter trying to wrap up your business, private property is private property and should a person choose to revoke your ability to access it that should be instant, this isn't something that needs fixing due to it not being "broken" to begin with, there are numerous warnings, this is EVE not hello kitty online, your choices have consequences


If you expect to remove someone from your place of business immediately, they are also entitled to taking their property with them without waiting 5-20 days to pick it up at some random point. Its their property, not yours. You have autonomy over the structure, but not their property within it.

The discrepancy here, is in it taking a few seconds/clicks to FORCE the player to lose access to their assets for 5-20 days, no matter what they do.

Its too easy and too immediate (a matter of seconds) compared for the repercussions for another players assets being withheld from them for 5-20 days.


Yes and no, if you are barred from my place of business i will arrange for your leftover items to be returned to you, this is unlikely to be immediate and any attempt to enter the property would actually be deemed trespass and illegal so yes, while your property would reside within mine and you would be entitled to get it back you would still be expected to wait, just like you do with citadels and in future outposts aswell

You were already warned twice via the contract system that you may not be able to dock at the station, if you still choose to ignore those warnings then don't complain that you're not allowed to dock in the destination, i mean what next, people complaining they get blown up while on route to a delivery station and complaining there needs to be some protection against that?
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#498 - 2017-05-31 14:40:47 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
An Upwell structure owner can block access to a players assets in a matter of seconds, thus forcing them to wait 5-20 days to regain access to their assets at another structure.

Meanwhile, the asset owner is SOL with no recourse to act against it.

If he activates Asset Safety, he has to wait 5-20 days to recover assets.

If he destroys the structure, he still has to wait 5-20 days to recover assets.

If the structure is unanchored, he still has to wait 5-20 days to recover assets.

Its 5-20 days no matter how you cut it.

And all this, just cos the Upwell structure owner spent a few seconds/clicks.
That is disproportionate.
Few seconds vs 5-20 days.



A delay in access/standing changes is justified to allow the player to wrap up their interests there, just the same as the Upwell structure owner has time to react to attacks during vulnerability window .

Quid pro quo.

Structure owner gets time to react to action against them, so too should players operating with the structure.


How about they don't stuff all their assets in one structure where they cannot be sure they will always have access to? If you split your stuff in multiple places, you effectively protect yourself from this.

It's really easy, if you don't like the risk of being locked out, don't store stuff there. Every single player in the game has other options. If they are not willing to use those options, it's their own fault.
Gimme Sake
State War Academy
Caldari State
#499 - 2017-05-31 14:49:56 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:


How about they don't stuff all their assets in one structure where they cannot be sure they will always have access to? If you split your stuff in multiple places, you effectively protect yourself from this.

It's really easy, if you don't like the risk of being locked out, don't store stuff there. Every single player in the game has other options. If they are not willing to use those options, it's their own fault.


If you buy from the market inside a citadel, 50 machariels for example, you need to have the freighters already docked and ready for transport, to prevent them from being frozen. Hiring a hauling company to deliver them is impossible because they would refuse citadel contracts.

"Never not blob!" ~ Plato

Salvos Rhoska
#500 - 2017-05-31 14:50:04 UTC
Cypherous wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Cypherous wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Cypherous wrote:
i don't see the issue


What issue do you have with a delay on changing standing/access settings in Upwell structures so they can wrap up their assets/interests/business before being forced into a systemic 5-20 day delay due to the structure owner spending a few seconds/clicks to lock them out?


The issue i have is that its complicating mechanics that don't really need complicating, if i bar you from my place of business i expect you to leave immediately, not to loiter trying to wrap up your business, private property is private property and should a person choose to revoke your ability to access it that should be instant, this isn't something that needs fixing due to it not being "broken" to begin with, there are numerous warnings, this is EVE not hello kitty online, your choices have consequences


If you expect to remove someone from your place of business immediately, they are also entitled to taking their property with them without waiting 5-20 days to pick it up at some random point. Its their property, not yours. You have autonomy over the structure, but not their property within it.

The discrepancy here, is in it taking a few seconds/clicks to FORCE the player to lose access to their assets for 5-20 days, no matter what they do.

Its too easy and too immediate (a matter of seconds) compared for the repercussions for another players assets being withheld from them for 5-20 days.


Yes and no, if you are barred from my place of business i will arrange for your leftover items to be returned to you, this is unlikely to be immediate and any attempt to enter the property would actually be deemed trespass and illegal so yes, while your property would reside within mine and you would be entitled to get it back you would still be expected to wait, just like you do with citadels and in future outposts aswell

You were already warned twice via the contract system that you may not be able to dock at the station, if you still choose to ignore those warnings then don't complain that you're not allowed to dock in the destination, i mean what next, people complaining they get blown up while on route to a delivery station and complaining there needs to be some protection against that?


Its their stuff. Why should they have to wait 5-20 days to get it out.
IRL they can send in a neutral party to retrieve their property immediately and you have no legal recourse to argue against it.
If you refuse to allow that party access to retrieve the assets, you will be considered as holding their property illegally.

Point being here, sure, you can lock them out of your premises, but a few seconds/clicks is disparate to forcing a 5-20 day denial of access from them to their assets.

A delay in the enacting of an access/standing change is the rational solution.

Essentially equal to stating you have x time to clear out your property, after which you are no longer welcome here.