EVE Information Portal

This is pretty much how I see it too: we're not saying you can't put your fingers in the plug socket, we're just asking you to sign a waiver first.



Ok, so you can't initiate a safe logoff until your timers have ended anyway. The benefit of safe logoff is:

• Unsafe logoff: you close the client, your ship turns off its modules, emergency-warps, sits in space for a minute and then disappears
• Safe logoff: you hit safe logoff, your ship sits in space for thirty seconds with its modules off, and then disappears

Other than not generating you an instant 1m km safespot, there's really no upside to unsafe logoff other than speed.



Same way they do currently



It's more that a) I think the average EVE player has too many confusing, unintuitive systems to deal already, and b) the big wins aren't about individual player safety, they're about systemic soundness.

For one thing, this system guarantees that nothing like a "lofty scam"* can happen without the player's explicit consent. Not just that the current implementation of the system happens to not have any loopholes in it (as it is on TQ currently, AFAIK), but that the system simply does not allow it at a fundamental level. By enforcing it on the server as well as the client, it also allows us to catch corner cases which are otherwise-unsolvable.

For example, if a pilot in a war ejects from a ship in space, docks up and leaves the corporation, there's no sound way to tell war targets on grid with the ship that its owner is no longer at war with them without incurring a crippling performance hit on the server (there's an extensive technical reason to do with the way we propagate states that I'm not going to try and remember perfectly here). The end-user experience is that your client believes that ship you're targeting is a legal target, but when the server processes your attack it disagrees and you get CONCORDed. By having a safety system, and by tracking your safety state on the server, we can intervene at the last second and say "hey, that's not a legal target, your safeties are on, so your gun doesn't fire". This is essentially a generalization of the fix that we put in for remote assistance to prevent people getting entire Incursion fleets CONCORDed by having one guy in the rep chain pick up a GCC, to illustrate a completely different situation in which this sort of problem also occurs.

* A whole class of scams, the common factor in which is that the victim dies without ever being given the information needed to determine that they're in danger



- Yes, it will. We're cognizant of the small additional load that this puts on people who regularly want it off; we don't believe the load is much larger than the one already incurred by eg having to turn on your hardeners all the time, so we don't believe it's a *major* problem, but we're also not totally happy with it (as we're not for hardeners either) and we'd like to find a clean way to persist it between sessions without violating its primary goals.

- Insofar as autopiloting involves warping, yes.



In those cases, you're losing your ship in a way that is not very silly, so the sentence does not apply. (I acknowledge the potential for ambiguity in the second quoted sentence but feel that the natural reading supports the intended meaning.)



This is counterbalanced by the fact that the safe logoff does *not* allow you to circumvent logoff timers, and the logoff timer for NPC aggression is now five minutes. I don't think you're going to have a problem.



Smartbombs require you to fully disable your safeties, yes. They're really not very smart, and there's no good way to prevent you from "accidentally" hitting that cloaked ship who sneaked into the mission with you and incurring the wrath of CONCORD.

So the timer in the picture is 45.6 seconds... why? Is this a mistake, or a late change?

Oh. Whoops. Late change. Lemme go fix that...

currently unless it has changed since last week it is not persistant

Why does the safe logoff have a shorter timer than the unsafe logoff?
That makes no sense. The entire point of the safe logoff is so you can see your ship during that minute and act if anything happens to it. I think it's rather coddling to reduce the timer.


With regards to smartbombing in highsec, I'm about to go test that on Buckingham. Will post results.
EDIT: Nevermind, just noticed this was addressed earlier.

However, I'd also like to ask this of the devs: is there anything being done about anchored containers preventing activation of smartbombs in their vicinity? It's currently being used in highsec ice fields to an extreme extent in order to provide large mining fleets with absolute immunity to the only kind of attack that can be used to deal with them. I'd consider this an exploit.

Possibly because you are missing out on the emergency warp?

Is making it persist between sessions on the table? I'd rather just turn it off and not have to deal with various safety settings ever.

so wait if we unsafe logoff we DONT warp 1m km?

if so...things will get very interesting

So this new safety mechanic is the reason you're bringing back snowballs for christmas.

I was thinking that I'd permanently have my safety's off, even when venturing through high sec but now I've thought about it I should probably turn them on in high sec so I don't get trolled by the inevitable snowball spammers.

If you're going to make it go back to "default" every time you log on, I would suggest you make it possible to change the default setting client side. Otherwise, pirates will be unhappy. And when pirates are unhappy, they tend to make life miserable for the rest of us :)