These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Change to Contracts System

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Taius Pax
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1 - 2012-01-03 20:32:57 UTC
Would it be possible to prevent people from creating contracts that ask for the same item they're selling? This would cut down on scamming a bit. Jita local's filled to the brim with advertisements for these types of contracts and it really adds to the noise level.
Nestara Aldent
Citimatics
#2 - 2012-01-03 20:44:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Nestara Aldent
Scamming is allowed on purpose.

Honestly from immersion and role play point of view, this is one of the rare games where you can really play as a bad guy. Which power-hungry ruthless corporation CEO who have his own military or pirate cutthroat wouldn't scam given the opportunity?

By the way the only thing necessary to avoid the scam is to pay attention to the contract text. I bought and sold many times through the contract system and I haven't been scammed even once because of that.
Taius Pax
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3 - 2012-01-03 21:03:36 UTC
Nestara Aldent wrote:
By the way the only thing necessary to avoid the scam is to pay attention to the contract text. I bought and sold many times through the contract system and I haven't been scammed even once because of that.


I've never been scammed myself, either by this or various other scams. But it leads to a lot of spam in the channel and chaff to sort through for no reason.

Nestara Aldent wrote:
Honestly from immersion and role play point of view


In real life people caught not delivering what they offered, doing bait and switch, or writing contracts with easily overlooked clauses end up fined or in jail. Also, there's an appeals process and consumer protections.

I'm not saying outlaw scamming as it creates a policing nightmare. Just get rid of one of the easily abused mechanics and clear the channel of it's most common noise. Let the signal (people with actual stuff to sell) through.
Nestara Aldent
Citimatics
#4 - 2012-01-03 21:09:00 UTC
Taius Pax wrote:
Nestara Aldent wrote:
By the way the only thing necessary to avoid the scam is to pay attention to the contract text. I bought and sold many times through the contract system and I haven't been scammed even once because of that.


I've never been scammed myself, either by this or various other scams. But it leads to a lot of spam in the channel and chaff to sort through for no reason.

Nestara Aldent wrote:
Honestly from immersion and role play point of view


In real life people caught not delivering what they offered, doing bait and switch, or writing contracts with easily overlooked clauses end up fined or in jail. Also, there's an appeals process and consumer protections.

I'm not saying outlaw scamming as it creates a policing nightmare. Just get rid of one of the easily abused mechanics and clear the channel of it's most common noise. Let the signal (people with actual stuff to sell) through.


Indeed, but in real life you can't shoot people either without being punished by the law.

Now look in Wild West with spaceships that's Eve, there are both gunslinger bandits and snake oil peddlers. And you know because it's like old Wild West, often they escape punishment.

I hope now you see how scams aid the immersion in the game.
Taius Pax
State War Academy
Caldari State
#5 - 2012-01-03 21:10:16 UTC
In addition: Other than scamming, is there any reason to request the same item you're offering in a contract? If not, to me it seems this easily abused mechanic should be blocked.
Taius Pax
State War Academy
Caldari State
#6 - 2012-01-03 21:13:11 UTC
Nestara Aldent wrote:
I hope now you see how scams aid the immersion in the game.


You seem to be arguing pro/con scamming, which is not the topic of my discussion. I'm talking about a mechanic in game that seems to have no legitimate function other than scamming and asking if it can be removed.

Kind of like how they removed search by item description - which was also heavily used in scamming.
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#7 - 2012-01-03 21:51:29 UTC
Taius Pax wrote:
In addition: Other than scamming, is there any reason to request the same item you're offering in a contract? If not, to me it seems this easily abused mechanic should be blocked.

Contracts are made to be super-modular and free. Using your change would, for example, block trade contracts for trading a fitted ship for fittings, or a rigged ship for rigs, or weird container contracts.

There are a lot of people proposing simple (and generally reasonable) rules like this, but the trouble is that for every rule preventing bad behavior, there are an uncountable amount of legitimate things it prevents, too. CCP takes the "laissez-faire" approach to that, and lets players manage themselves.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
Taius Pax
State War Academy
Caldari State
#8 - 2012-01-03 22:09:51 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
There are a lot of people proposing simple (and generally reasonable) rules like this, but the trouble is that for every rule preventing bad behavior, there are an uncountable amount of legitimate things it prevents, too. CCP takes the "laissez-faire" approach to that, and lets players manage themselves.


I understand what you mean and appreciate the comment. Those are the kind of issues I was hoping would be brought out.

Exploring a little further: What about looking at the case where item lists are exact? Instead of blocking contracts that have a intersecting sets of items offered and requested, block only ones that have identical offered and requested items?
CCP Atlas
C C P
C C P Alliance
#9 - 2012-01-04 07:52:48 UTC
Taius Pax wrote:
What about looking at the case where item lists are exact? Instead of blocking contracts that have a intersecting sets of items offered and requested, block only ones that have identical offered and requested items?

Makes sense, there's probably no legitimate reason for that sort of a contract.
el alasar
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2012-01-04 08:25:14 UTC  |  Edited by: el alasar
CCP Atlas wrote:
Taius Pax wrote:
What about looking at the case where item lists are exact? Instead of blocking contracts that have a intersecting sets of items offered and requested, block only ones that have identical offered and requested items?

Makes sense, there's probably no legitimate reason for that sort of a contract.

sure there is a use, for traders offering a "broker service": offer a buy contract to people who want to get rid of that item fast and offer a sell contract to people who just want to buy that item fast. risk of market price change and trouble with contract handling is with the broker, thats what he gets paid for.

scamming is a whole different story. although it could fairly easy be detected by applying price checks per item (also in contracts) based on some long-running average. the same algorithm should also be applied to price warnings for regular market orders. those warnings are quite often absurd as they are apparently based on "wrong" values (when there is low volume, outlier get far too much weight... take an eve-wide running average, not just for that region). please see also bug report 120928.

check the moderated 10000 papercuts evelopedia page! http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Little_things_and_ideas_-_low_hanging_fruit_-_10000_papercuts comment, bump(!) and like what you like
Taius Pax
State War Academy
Caldari State
#11 - 2012-01-04 15:44:55 UTC
el alasar wrote:
sure there is a use, for traders offering a "broker service": offer a buy contract to people who want to get rid of that item fast and offer a sell contract to people who just want to buy that item fast. risk of market price change and trouble with contract handling is with the broker, thats what he gets paid for.

Do you mean as separate buy and sell contracts? I don't see that as a problem. I'm only referring to the case of a single contract that offers some items and requests those exact same items back in addition to isk.
Jafit McJafitson
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#12 - 2012-01-04 15:54:48 UTC
If you send me 100m isk right now I'll implement this change for you immediately, and for a limited time I will also throw in this this Republic Fleet Firetail absolutly free
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#13 - 2012-01-04 16:03:47 UTC
CCP Atlas wrote:
Taius Pax wrote:
What about looking at the case where item lists are exact? Instead of blocking contracts that have a intersecting sets of items offered and requested, block only ones that have identical offered and requested items?

Makes sense, there's probably no legitimate reason for that sort of a contract.


Wait, CCP commenting in F&I? Since when?

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
ShipToaster
#14 - 2012-01-04 16:33:48 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Wait, CCP commenting in F&I? Since when?


Dude, remember the three unwritten rules of CCP posting in F&I.

Rule 1) The change has to benefit carebears.

Rule 2) Never post in any thread of importance.

Rule 3) It has to be a **** easy fix.


.
el alasar
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2012-01-04 16:43:24 UTC
Taius Pax wrote:
el alasar wrote:
sure there is a use, for traders offering a "broker service": offer a buy contract to people who want to get rid of that item fast and offer a sell contract to people who just want to buy that item fast. risk of market price change and trouble with contract handling is with the broker, thats what he gets paid for.

Do you mean as separate buy and sell contracts? I don't see that as a problem. I'm only referring to the case of a single contract that offers some items and requests those exact same items back in addition to isk.

like "you pay 200 mil, you get 1 plex, you also pay 1 plex"? yeah, agreed, this is pure scam. Ugh

check the moderated 10000 papercuts evelopedia page! http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Little_things_and_ideas_-_low_hanging_fruit_-_10000_papercuts comment, bump(!) and like what you like
CCP Atlas
C C P
C C P Alliance
#16 - 2012-01-04 17:02:42 UTC
ShipToaster wrote:
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Wait, CCP commenting in F&I? Since when?


Dude, remember the three unwritten rules of CCP posting in F&I.

Rule 1) The change has to benefit carebears.

Rule 2) Never post in any thread of importance.

Rule 3) It has to be a **** easy fix.



You forgot one:

Rule 4) Enough time has passed since your last post so that you have forgotten that you always get trolled when you post in F&I
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#17 - 2012-01-04 17:07:46 UTC
CCP Atlas wrote:
ShipToaster wrote:
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Wait, CCP commenting in F&I? Since when?


Dude, remember the three unwritten rules of CCP posting in F&I.

Rule 1) The change has to benefit carebears.

Rule 2) Never post in any thread of importance.

Rule 3) It has to be a **** easy fix.



You forgot one:

Rule 4) Enough time has passed since your last post so that you have forgotten that you always get trolled when you post in F&I


Don't kid yourself, you get trolled when you post anywhere.

I thought CCP wasn't supposed to post in F&I to "better engender player discussion without introducing dev bias" or something. I mean, you saying that those contracts are not legitimate was absolutely fine, but I was genuinely surprised to see a dev commenting in F&I. If I sounded like a troll that's because I'm a terrible person.

There is only one or two "legitimate" uses of contract trading an item for the same item plus something else: items that are of the same type, but differ in what they actually are. For example, fitted/rigged ships, or corpses.

For a more concrete example, a legitimate contract would be me trading Chribba's corpse for CCP Atlas's corpse plus 1 bil ISK.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
ShipToaster
#18 - 2012-01-04 19:16:42 UTC
CCP Atlas wrote:
ShipToaster wrote:
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Wait, CCP commenting in F&I? Since when?


Dude, remember the three unwritten rules of CCP posting in F&I.

Rule 1) The change has to benefit carebears.

Rule 2) Never post in any thread of importance.

Rule 3) It has to be a **** easy fix.



You forgot one:

Rule 4) Enough time has passed since your last post so that you have forgotten that you always get trolled when you post in F&I


Lol

That was not trolling; this is trolling.

Rule 5) All CCP employees posting in F&I must be in the appropriate :$1000 Jeans:

Rule 6) Only one post per employee per :18 months:

Rule 7) Before posting ask yourself "What would Jesus Features do"?

A bit tired and this is the best I can come up with :(

.
ShipToaster
#19 - 2012-01-04 19:22:39 UTC  |  Edited by: ShipToaster
But you know we would never really troll the guy who sits on the right hand side of the man whose name must not pass my lips, as I am not worthy, in real life for real. Cool

(it is quite funny looking at dev posts and seeing next to a CCP name the first 3 unwritten rules for posting)

.