These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#41 - 2017-05-22 23:12:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Aedaxus wrote:
Shawn en Tilavine wrote:
BREAKING NEWS: CCP makes the game; players make the rules.

Players don't make the rules, CCP made the rules in the EULA and the Terms of Service. You'll learn after a few permabans.

The contract system is risky but at least offers a sign at the player owned structure contracts, so stop taking them. Let the POS owners complain and ragequit. CCP starts to care once their income dwindles.
CCP provide a fairly loose set of basic rules for us to play hard and fast with, the concrete rules like no racism, sexism, homophobia, RL threats etc are common sense rules; outside of the concrete rules and within the looser set we make our own, normally at the end of a gun.

One such example of us making our own rules is a constant source of anguish and tears on the forum, I'll leave it to your imagination what that example is Twisted

edit ~ a few permabans? That's an oxymoron if I ever saw one.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#42 - 2017-05-22 23:13:23 UTC
Aedaxus wrote:
Shawn en Tilavine wrote:
BREAKING NEWS: CCP makes the game; players make the rules.

Players don't make the rules, CCP made the rules in the EULA and the Terms of Service. You'll learn after a few permabans.

The contract system is risky but at least offers a sign at the player owned structure contracts, so stop taking them. Let the POS owners complain and ragequit. CCP starts to care once their income dwindles.


Yes, CCP created the EULA and TOS, but every other "norm", "standard", "rule", whatever you want to call it is a result of players interacting.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Shawn en Tilavine
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#43 - 2017-05-22 23:48:25 UTC
Aedaxus wrote:
Shawn en Tilavine wrote:
BREAKING NEWS: CCP makes the game; players make the rules.

Players don't make the rules, CCP made the rules in the EULA and the Terms of Service. You'll learn after a few permabans

Yeah, ok. Lol. I would think you would know better, having been around for so long.

"The world ain't fair, there is no Santa Claus, and not everyone gets a F'n trophy just for showing up. Welcome to the real world. Welcome to Eve."
Coralas
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#44 - 2017-05-22 23:59:04 UTC
Khara Hirl wrote:
Mr Epeen wrote:
If this becomes a big problem, people will simply stop taking those contracts.

It's self correcting.

No need to howl for CCP because you don't bother to check the drop off location and get blapped.

Mr Epeen Cool



No no, see what you're not getting isn't that I can't pay attention to contracts, my point is that a mechanic is in place that lets people REJECT your entry even after you have a courier contract going to that citadel, this can be fixed by allowing deliveries outside the citadel.


Contract -> issuer -> contracts -> finished contracts.

No no, see what you are not getting, is that you are not paying attention to the most important detail in the contract.
Lulu Lunette
Savage Moon Society
#45 - 2017-05-23 00:36:15 UTC
I have to agree with the OP that it's very abusive.

@lunettelulu7
Eve Griefer
Doomheim
#46 - 2017-05-23 02:46:01 UTC
I should post on the appropriate character (i.e. hauler capable), but there is a channel (Hauler's Channel) and they are (maybe were?) maintaining whitelists and blacklists for HS citadels. Also, using two characters for handling contracts (as was pointed out) is sensible.
Lastly, let the contract timeout rather than fail early. You may get lucky and it may annoy the scammer.
Mr Mieyli
Doomheim
#47 - 2017-05-23 02:56:09 UTC
Wanda Fayne wrote:
because choosing "not to play" should never be a design goal...


Ha, good luck getting anyone to agree to that statement here. Sometimes I seriously believe that the 'leave-everything-as-it-is' crowd is just depressed and hopeless that EVE could ever grow large. Its either that or playing eve feeds a superiority complex, but in truth EVE is easy, you guys are no different or better than any other MMO community.

This post brought to you by CCP's alpha forum alt initiative. Playing the eve forums has never come cheaper.
Kaeden 3142
State War Academy
Caldari State
#48 - 2017-05-23 03:30:39 UTC
Being a courier contract should be just that and the accessibility of the station should be known . But given the hive of villainy of eve it doesn't surprise me.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#49 - 2017-05-23 03:35:55 UTC
Mr Mieyli wrote:
Wanda Fayne wrote:
because choosing "not to play" should never be a design goal...


Ha, good luck getting anyone to agree to that statement here. Sometimes I seriously believe that the 'leave-everything-as-it-is' crowd is just depressed and hopeless that EVE could ever grow large. Its either that or playing eve feeds a superiority complex, but in truth EVE is easy, you guys are no different or better than any other MMO community.



I'm sorry you continue to be unhappy with EVE and apparen'ty unhappy about the fact that more people aren't jumping on your 'progress' bandwagon, but that's a personal problem.

Some of us like what it is and want that continue rather than watch CCP stupidly chase the masses that won't come no matter what they try to do. Our experience so far with EVE (and other games) is that the choice is not between more people or less people, it's between people who like what EVE (and other sandboxy adult oriented games) is (which is a unique game that isn't for everyone one), and no people at all.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#50 - 2017-05-23 03:40:32 UTC
Mr Mieyli wrote:
Wanda Fayne wrote:
because choosing "not to play" should never be a design goal...


Ha, good luck getting anyone to agree to that statement here. Sometimes I seriously believe that the 'leave-everything-as-it-is' crowd is just depressed and hopeless that EVE could ever grow large. Its either that or playing eve feeds a superiority complex, but in truth EVE is easy, you guys are no different or better than any other MMO community.


Nobody agrees with it because it is patently false. Just because you can't complete a given contract you can't do anything else in game...at all?

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#51 - 2017-05-23 03:43:29 UTC
Was there a good reason to lock the hauler out of the station?

Or was it done SOLELY for the purpose of griefing?

Or maybe it's done by people who hate citadels? Just like not honoring ransoms (and spreading the "common sense" that nobody honored them) with the intent to wreck lowsec piracy?


Those would be my questions.

Meanwhile the usual answers from the usual people. Nothing new there.


We all know how the game is affected when mechanics favor one side over the other, right? But the usual suspects are not trying to play the game to win it, they want to destroy it.
Too bad Tyler Durden never really existed. He won't be giving awards.

Were it up to me™, hauling contracts would be dead anyway. Let them give a griefing that nobody shows up for.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#52 - 2017-05-23 03:44:07 UTC
Kaeden 3142 wrote:
Being a courier contract should be just that and the accessibility of the station should be known . But given the hive of villainy of eve it doesn't surprise me.


Risk....the notion of risk should be present and as has been pointed out there is a warning that the destination station may not be accessible. You take a risk...and it didn't work out...oh well, learn from your mistake.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#53 - 2017-05-23 03:51:16 UTC
Eve Griefer wrote:
I should post on the appropriate character (i.e. hauler capable), but there is a channel (Hauler's Channel) and they are (maybe were?) maintaining whitelists and blacklists for HS citadels. Also, using two characters for handling contracts (as was pointed out) is sensible.
Lastly, let the contract timeout rather than fail early. You may get lucky and it may annoy the scammer.


Why not do this? Go to the Market Discussion forum and create a list there. Put these guys on it as your first entrant. As others post their experiences you can add to the list, both the good and the bad.

Instead we get the usual whining about wanting CCP to do their work for them so they don't have face any actual risk.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Kaeden 3142
State War Academy
Caldari State
#54 - 2017-05-23 04:04:11 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Kaeden 3142 wrote:
Being a courier contract should be just that and the accessibility of the station should be known . But given the hive of villainy of eve it doesn't surprise me.


Risk....the notion of risk should be present and as has been pointed out there is a warning that the destination station may not be accessible. You take a risk...and it didn't work out...oh well, learn from your mistake.


agreed. Though, those contract conditions were meant for player own stations in Nul sec, A hi sec courier contract you could assume its of lower risk. It places all courier contracts to player own citadels at high risk.
Wanda Fayne
#55 - 2017-05-23 04:12:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Wanda Fayne
where's my facepalm emoji...Sad

close enough

"your comments just confirms this whole idea is totally pathetic" -Lan Wang-

  • - "hub humping station gamey neutral logi warspam wankery" -Ralph King-Griffin-
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#56 - 2017-05-23 04:30:33 UTC
Kaeden 3142 wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Kaeden 3142 wrote:
Being a courier contract should be just that and the accessibility of the station should be known . But given the hive of villainy of eve it doesn't surprise me.


Risk....the notion of risk should be present and as has been pointed out there is a warning that the destination station may not be accessible. You take a risk...and it didn't work out...oh well, learn from your mistake.


agreed. Though, those contract conditions were meant for player own stations in Nul sec, A hi sec courier contract you could assume its of lower risk. It places all courier contracts to player own citadels at high risk.


It is lower risk, it is not NS where you'll have 4 supers and a titan dropped on your JF.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Mr Mieyli
Doomheim
#57 - 2017-05-23 04:32:50 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Mr Mieyli wrote:
Wanda Fayne wrote:
because choosing "not to play" should never be a design goal...


Ha, good luck getting anyone to agree to that statement here. Sometimes I seriously believe that the 'leave-everything-as-it-is' crowd is just depressed and hopeless that EVE could ever grow large. Its either that or playing eve feeds a superiority complex, but in truth EVE is easy, you guys are no different or better than any other MMO community.



I'm sorry you continue to be unhappy with EVE and apparen'ty unhappy about the fact that more people aren't jumping on your 'progress' bandwagon, but that's a personal problem.

Some of us like what it is and want that continue rather than watch CCP stupidly chase the masses that won't come no matter what they try to do. Our experience so far with EVE (and other games) is that the choice is not between more people or less people, it's between people who like what EVE (and other sandboxy adult oriented games) is (which is a unique game that isn't for everyone one), and no people at all.


Jesus man how many times do I need to repeat to you that I don't want to ruin your game before it gets through to you. I have no power over the course of the games development more than my voice on these forums, here I can influence others.

Stop stalking me dude.

This post brought to you by CCP's alpha forum alt initiative. Playing the eve forums has never come cheaper.
FIX IT
Numbers Inc
Mekharist Combine
#58 - 2017-05-23 05:43:13 UTC
How about an option to not sell to citadels, and not deliver to citadels. A check mark - do not show sell orders in citadels, do not fulfill buy orders in citadels, do not show contracts to and from citadels.

Surely that is a fair option? If we are going to have a free market lets have a real free market, if I don't want to sell to someone I should not be forced to sell to them. If I don't want to deliver to any citadel, let me easily filter it out.

If they have an easy UI option to stop people from docking with their citadels we should have a similar UI option to black list them.
Tuttomenui II
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#59 - 2017-05-23 06:05:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Tuttomenui II
Gaia Ma'chello wrote:
I actually like the idea of being able to have courier contracts completed without docking. It means I can have stuff delivered to me without having to worry that in doing so I would be letting an enemy dock in my station.


This is how that would look in Eve if it was implemented to fit in to Eve.

Jenn aSide wrote:
ISD Max Trix wrote:
Why would CCP change it? It was the same way for Null Stations and Outpost, why wouldn't Citadels be the same way? If you look at the contact destination it says "Destination may not be accessible." or some such thing.


Because it ain't fair man, I mean no one reads that warning anyways, who reads signs now adays? Twisted


People who don't read signs get eaten by the crocs in Florida golf course hazards.
Coralas
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#60 - 2017-05-23 06:12:38 UTC
Kaeden 3142 wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Kaeden 3142 wrote:
Being a courier contract should be just that and the accessibility of the station should be known . But given the hive of villainy of eve it doesn't surprise me.


Risk....the notion of risk should be present and as has been pointed out there is a warning that the destination station may not be accessible. You take a risk...and it didn't work out...oh well, learn from your mistake.


agreed. Though, those contract conditions were meant for player own stations in Nul sec, A hi sec courier contract you could assume its of lower risk. It places all courier contracts to player own citadels at high risk.


(a) you can accept outbound contracts from within the citadel, which means you shouldn't get caught by starting points being inaccessible.

(b) the public courier contract list clearly indicates when the destination is a citadel, ie you don't have to click on a contract to see that its going to a citadel, so the time taken to avoid citadel destination contracts is trivial.

(c) the character issuing the contract has a public contract history for its public contracts.

(d) over time citadel destination contracts should raise in price, so it should become worth your time to sort through them to reduce the scam chance to very little by only taking contracts from issuers with good histories.