These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Ship Lease contracts:
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
h4kun4
Banana-Republic.
Shadow Cartel
#1 - 2017-03-23 15:55:35 UTC
Suggestion:
Lease Contracts in three types - Public, Private and Corporate (+alliance)

How it works:
Simmilar to a Courier.
except that lease only works on assembled ships and their cargohold, loose items are not allowed in the contract.


Possible Scenarios:
Person A wants to make some ISK so he puts his incursion Machariel on Public Lease, because he is far way and doesnt need it currently anyways.
Person B looks for an Incursion Ship so he can fly with a sophisticated group of runners, but he is too poor to buy one yet.
B now looks for a proper ship, he can look for the ship just like an item exchange contract, a doubleclick will open him the contract details.


Corp/Alliance X wants to provide Fleetships for the members

Contracts Display the fitting, the contract details and the costs.

Details:
Lease Duration - how long till he has to give it back
Return Location - the place the ship has to be when the contract ends
Location Settings (checkboxes): Highsec - Lowsec - Nullsec - exclude citadels

It is not possible to load a leased ship into a Ship maintenance bay or to eject from it in space, also it is not possible to take it somewhere the contracts Location settings didn't allow it to be. (Cant jump a highsec only into lowsec)
Capitals and Black Ops can be jumped on Cynos but only within the allowed space (lowsec only can't jump on a nullsec cyno)
Ships can only jump through wormholes if nullsec is allowed.

Costs: - all except the lease fee will be returned to the contractor upon completion
Collateral - the Amount of ISK the encoder gets in case the ship blows up
Return Penalty Fee - paid by the contractor for not bringing the ship back to the return station
Lease Fee - The amount of ISK the encoder gets for leasing the ship to the contractor

Explanation:
Lease Duration: 1 - 14 Days, if the ship is no longer needed the contract can be ended by the contractor, he will still fully pay all the fees and will get all depostits refunded.

Return Location:
(non)specific location where the ship is to be dropped off, it can be anything from a specific station to a region, or even just anywhere in highesc or just anywhere the contractor wants.

Return Settings:
The settings allow the encoder to set certain criteria where he wants his ship back.


Collateral:
Since it is stupid to pull a collateral from the account of someone who is probaly too poor to afford the ship itself the collateral the contractor pays is platinum insurance cost + whatever the encoder wants extra.
Upon death of the ship the encoder then gets a mail that his ship was killed and he gets platinum insurance paid out + whatever deposit he asked for


The Return Penalty Fee:
The encoder has to set a fixed prepaid penalty which will be refunded completely or partially depending on the return location of the leased ship. (Fee will be subtracted with jumps and the rest will be returned)
It is equal to 1million ISK per jump on the shortest route within the settings. If the ship was meant to be highsec only, then lowsec jumps will not be counted except they are impossible to get around (hisec islands).

If the number of jumps exceeds the fixed penalty fee, all of the fixed penalty fee will be paid regardless of the jumps.
In case the contractor is still piloting the ship upon ending of the contract, the contractor will not be refunded any deposits and the ship will be returned to the possesion of the encoder (on the next dockable station within contract boundaries) after the next downtime. (also citadels if not excluded)
For Corporate and alliance contract to the corporate deliveries on the next dockable station (also citadels if not excluded)

its quite much to read
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
#2 - 2017-03-23 16:12:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Merin Ryskin
This is pointless. Nobody will let you have a ship without enough collateral to ensure its safe return, and if you can afford the collateral you can afford to buy the ship yourself. This is the inevitable problem with rental/loan contracts in EVE. In the real world there are consequences (arrest and prison) for fraud, in EVE fraud is celebrated as a victory and you can always make a new character.

Also, enforcing things like the automatic return if the ship if you refuse to return it violates a core premise of EVE: that the game does not enforce trust. If you steal the ship you steal the ship, the game should not step in and change this fact.
Dolorous Tremmens
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2017-03-23 16:14:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Dolorous Tremmens
Insurance doesn't cover the price of mods.

You want the game to "pay" (magically transport) to move the ship back to the owner from wherever place it is left in. I will lease the ship from myself and take it to the warzone. if it survives it will magically return to me across vast distances owned by people that hate me and the people I fly with without risk.

Since i control both sides of the contract it is just a free return for me, and less clutter that i will abandon when I'm done and too lazy to move.

Now, any corp or person too poor to provide for themselves should not be flying something they cannot afford to lose, its a cardinal rule of eve.

Get some Eve. Make it yours.
Bjorn Tyrson
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#4 - 2017-03-23 17:07:06 UTC
/\ Those two sum it up exactly.

I like the idea of it (and I have loaned out ships to friends in the past) and have even ran a "rent to own" type service for corp members back in the day. but that was all in corp and for friends. for a perfect stranger, I would never put up a ship without the collateral being equal to or exceeding the value of the ship. in which case they could just buy it.

the ONLY possibly use I could see for this would be freighter rental, for example I have an alt skilled up to fly a freighter, but I rarely if ever find myself actually needing to move that quantity of material and so I don't own one myself.
In a very niche case like mine, where I might only need a freighter for 1 or 2 days a month, it might be worth the fee in order to rent one instead of buying for that day or two.

but then again right now when i'm in situation like that I just hire a hauler and save myself the time and risk of moving it myself. which is even safer, easier, and well worth the few extra mill to not have to deal with it myself... so I take it back, even if a feature like this did exist (and I am the perfect potential client for it) I still wouldn't use it.
Dark Lord Trump
Infinite Point
Pandemic Horde
#5 - 2017-03-23 22:24:43 UTC
This seems really complex for very little benefit. I'm quite certain that someone will find a loophole allowing the leaser to scam the leasee or vice versa, and then no one will use them.

I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#6 - 2017-03-23 22:40:33 UTC
You know what, I don't see a huge number of uses for it, but I do see some uses for it.

I disagree that "if you have the isk for a collateral, you would just buy it". You don't ever buy what you can't afford to lose. But Eve is a game of risk!

Imagine a player with 3 billion isk to their name. They want to use a corp member's 2.5 bil carrier. I would never want to spend 75% of my liquid assets on a single ship. That's just crazy. Yes if I lose it, then I end up paying for it.. but we watch local, have scouts, etc. Possibility of loss is low. Possibility of gain is high. Risk vs reward.

Another possibility would be doctrine ships. We use Tempests. Infrequently. Of course with it being doctrine, I must have it for when it gets called up. I would far rather lease it (for an appropriate fee) and not have the capital outlay for a ship that I only end up using once a month at best. If I lose it, then the collateral is sent back as SRP.

Realistically it can be used for any doctrine. The alliance gets a little for "seeding the market" in the form of leasing, and the players end up not having to deal with stale assets. If you want to own the asset because you use it often, fine. But for those "yea we call for these once in a blue moon" kind of things, makes more sense to let the rich people have 5 of them and lease them out as-needed.


The risks of abuse can all be mitigated.

- Kill farming: player should not have leased from a neutral
- Collateral farming: player should have evepraisal'd the fit (which would be visible prior to accepting)
- Ship theft: would work the same as courier theft


I'm not saying I support developer time for it, but I could see the occasional usage out of it, and it would potentially be nice to be able to get some isk flowing from stale assets.
Zerzzes Markarian
McCloud and Markarian Trade and Logistics Corp.
#7 - 2017-03-24 00:15:54 UTC
The return option is nonsense as described above. Make it simpler, just pay a collateral of the price of the ship and it could be used for doctrine ships...
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
#8 - 2017-03-24 05:21:02 UTC
Old Pervert wrote:
Imagine a player with 3 billion isk to their name. They want to use a corp member's 2.5 bil carrier. I would never want to spend 75% of my liquid assets on a single ship. That's just crazy. Yes if I lose it, then I end up paying for it.. but we watch local, have scouts, etc. Possibility of loss is low. Possibility of gain is high. Risk vs reward.


That doesn't make any sense. If you can confidently say that you won't lose the 2.5 billion ISK carrier then you can just buy a carrier and sell it when you're done. Yeah, you lose a bit on the market transactions, but you're going to lose money paying a rental fee (otherwise why would the owner agree to rent their ship?). The only way this could possibly be any benefit is if you're talking about a friend who is willing to let you use the ship for free, but in that case you don't need an official contract to make it work. They just contract you the ship and let you return it when you're done.

Also, only paying the collateral if the ship is lost does not work. Otherwise you have people accept the contract with an alt with an empty wallet, give the ship to their main, and when the contract is broken there's no money to pay the collateral. Sucks to be the former owner of the ship, who gets nothing. The collateral has to be placed in escrow as soon as the contract is accepted, so 75% of your liquid assets are tied up either way (unless your corp mate is willing to set the collateral to less than the price of the carrier and risk having you take the ship and run).

Quote:
Another possibility would be doctrine ships. We use Tempests. Infrequently. Of course with it being doctrine, I must have it for when it gets called up. I would far rather lease it (for an appropriate fee) and not have the capital outlay for a ship that I only end up using once a month at best. If I lose it, then the collateral is sent back as SRP.


This also doesn't make any sense. Why screw around with all these rental contracts when the corp/alliance can just keep a stockpile on hand and issue them when necessary? That's an even better option because only the players who are actually going to be involved in the rare fleet get the ships, instead of having to set up contracts for everyone that could possibly be involved at some hypothetical future date.

Quote:
- Ship theft: would work the same as courier theft


And that's the problem that kills 99.9999% of potential uses. Unless the collateral is equal to the cost of the ship the "renter" will inevitably break the contract and keep the ship. If the collateral is high enough that they won't break the contract then they're gaining no advantage over just buying the ship. So you can only make the system work in cases where everyone trusts each other, but in those cases you don't need a game mechanic to create the contract.
h4kun4
Banana-Republic.
Shadow Cartel
#9 - 2017-03-24 13:44:53 UTC  |  Edited by: h4kun4
you all have quite good points, i tried ti mitigate all loopholes for public, but it seems there are too many to plug for the system to viable and realistic, but well im not perfect.
Maybe its after all more of a niche feature for private transactions, corps and alliances who rely on trust when leasing ships to their members and buddies, so fraud would not be much of a bigger problem than it is now and is punished by kick or eternal hatred.

It would be kind of less work, creating a dozen contracts people can accept on demand is less hassle than, if you are to trade ships to people and then keep a list on who has what and who died in what. The contract window would tell who has what and who failed which contract by dying.
Upon loss the SRP (if they do that) would take care anyways and the insurance would be transferred to corp/alliance wallet.
It would after all become nothing more than less administrative work
Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#10 - 2017-03-24 15:43:56 UTC
Merin Ryskin wrote:

That doesn't make any sense. If you can confidently say that you won't lose the 2.5 billion ISK carrier then you can just buy a carrier and sell it when you're done. Yeah, you lose a bit on the market transactions, but you're going to lose money paying a rental fee (otherwise why would the owner agree to rent their ship?). The only way this could possibly be any benefit is if you're talking about a friend who is willing to let you use the ship for free, but in that case you don't need an official contract to make it work. They just contract you the ship and let you return it when you're done.

This is Eve... you should never trust your friends until you know where they live IRL so that you can molotov their house. Friends in Eve work together, but trust is still an arms-length thing. A formal contract makes things less "he borrowed my ship and logged off for 3 months to take a break" or similar.

Merin Ryskin wrote:

Also, only paying the collateral if the ship is lost does not work. Otherwise you have people accept the contract with an alt with an empty wallet, give the ship to their main, and when the contract is broken there's no money to pay the collateral. Sucks to be the former owner of the ship, who gets nothing. The collateral has to be placed in escrow as soon as the contract is accepted, so 75% of your liquid assets are tied up either way (unless your corp mate is willing to set the collateral to less than the price of the carrier and risk having you take the ship and run).

If I create a courier contract and put a reward of 1m isk, it takes that 1m isk immediately. It doesn't wait until the contract is fulfilled. Why would you expect this contract to work different from literally any other contract involving ISK transfer?

As to why ISK in escrow is better than spending it, you get the isk back sans fees. Your isk is "invested" in this case, in a ratting ship. You get a return from ticks, they get a return from having their ship generate income. Say you try the carrier, decide you don't like it... hey I bought a Thanny, now I want a Niddy. Glad I only leased it, my net cost was quite small relatively speaking. I also don't have to wait for someone to buy it from me/firesale it.

Merin Ryskin wrote:

This also doesn't make any sense. Why screw around with all these rental contracts when the corp/alliance can just keep a stockpile on hand and issue them when necessary? That's an even better option because only the players who are actually going to be involved in the rare fleet get the ships, instead of having to set up contracts for everyone that could possibly be involved at some hypothetical future date.

Also known as a built-in mechanic to do what we're abstracting now. Alliances loan ships out to coalition members, usually at full price to prevent theft. Now there's a mechanic to simply get them back automatically. Less administrative overhead (the "return" of the ships) means corp logistics people spend less time doing logistics... who would complain about that?

Merin Ryskin wrote:

And that's the problem that kills 99.9999% of potential uses. Unless the collateral is equal to the cost of the ship the "renter" will inevitably break the contract and keep the ship. If the collateral is high enough that they won't break the contract then they're gaining no advantage over just buying the ship. So you can only make the system work in cases where everyone trusts each other, but in those cases you don't need a game mechanic to create the contract.

I fail to see how that kills any uses. The collateral being the ship value is the only way to do it, but it is literally irrelevant for anyone not planning to steal the ship. If they are planning to steal the ship, then they should only do so when the collateral is in their favour. This system is quite literally the opposite of what you've said, a way for people who don't trust each other (fully) to lend ships with a contract to ensure the terms of the agreement are more closely honoured.
h4kun4
Banana-Republic.
Shadow Cartel
#11 - 2017-03-31 01:02:12 UTC  |  Edited by: h4kun4
well the trust issue isnt really worth talking about, in alliances and corps it is like you break trust you get kicked of even awoxed and then kicked. If people are willing to take the risk, so be it.

ofc all i wrote in the OP about fees and stuff was in escrows, agreeing to a collateral and paying later would be pointless because you could abuse that to eternity

i tend to favor actual ingame mechanic over abstraction by players, lol i would even support an ingame coalition system xD
Thats is one of the central points of that idea.

Since platinum insurance for the ship loss would go directly to the alliance/corp/owner of the ship you could actually put the ships as doctrines on lease contract for less than they are worth (insurance fee + fit instead of hull + fit)
Only in case of loss ofc, theft would not be covered thats why that would be more alike an alliance or corp thing to do

just to get an impression: (all fits t2) ~potential save for doctrines on lease
Attack BC - ~50 mil less (ship icl. fit 120m) ~41%
Logi - ~40mil less (260mil) ~ 15%
Faction BS - ~90mil less (550mil) ~16%
Carrier - ~850mil less (2,3b) ~37%

and those are jita, not cosidered the usual 10-20% win on ship contracts in nullsec