These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#221 - 2017-05-24 17:34:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Herzog Wolfhammer
Scialt wrote:
My main issue with this is that it's kind of an action without a counter. At it's heart I view Eve as a "rock/paper/scissors" type game. There is almost always a way to succeed (though you may not have the resources to make it happen).

In the case of this particular issue... there really isn't one. If you read the contract, check your access... do everything right... and then after you accept the contract your access gets dropped... you're left without options. The only way to "win" that exchange is to not play.

Having an exterior "drop box" (like you have at a library where you can drop your books off even when the building is not open)... seems to add that. You can still create contracts in low-sec or null and try to gank the delivery person... but it becomes a contest between the hauler and the ganker/contract maker... which is GREAT. What we have now doesn't add content... because the delivery man is unable to make the delivery.

And yes... it can be avoided by never taking a courier job delivering to a citadel. But that action (once everyone finally figures out that is the only response to this that will work) results in no courier deliveries to citadels being possible. I can't see how that is a good thing. If the successful action is to not play a part of the game... you have a problem.






Funny part about this is that at the other end, somebody was closely watching the contract, ready to click that button to deny access. Risk free and under the cover of safe mechanics.

Think about what kind of person that is, on the other end, who plays like that. Who is capable of sitting there watching text on a screen like that, finger poised on the button. Their brain actually get a dopamine dose from that. What kind of brain gets that dopamine from an action like that?
(hint: the kind that normal people won't pay to play with. In before "hurr durr normies")

As if mining and gate camping did not already prove mental health issues.

Even gankers garner more respect than this current ploy. They run a gauntlet in criminal status, take their chances, lose a ship, etc.

In the end this won't have much of an effect on haulers. They won't take citadel destined contracts. Then we'll see the Church of HTFU, ever lifeless and having nothing better to do, complaining about "risk averse highsec carebears" relying on NPC stations to take deliveries and how CPP needs to find a way to punish citadel owners who still take deliveries at NPC stations. Terrible friendless people as usual.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Scialt
Corporate Navy Police Force
#222 - 2017-05-24 18:05:56 UTC
Tricia Killnu wrote:
The citadel in question that's part of the scam can be destroyed.

Go destroy it. Get someone to destroy it.

PVP

Content

I just gave you

Please send me isk for such ideas you are all sweet things and you know you want to P


Doing so will still cost the hauler the collateral. It might make them feel better... but that's it.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#223 - 2017-05-24 18:08:43 UTC
Scialt wrote:
Tricia Killnu wrote:
The citadel in question that's part of the scam can be destroyed.

Go destroy it. Get someone to destroy it.

PVP

Content

I just gave you

Please send me isk for such ideas you are all sweet things and you know you want to P


Doing so will still cost the hauler the collateral. It might make them feel better... but that's it.


Still a dead citadel and they will be added to the list of untrustworthy organisations/players.
Scialt
Corporate Navy Police Force
#224 - 2017-05-24 18:08:50 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Scialt wrote:
My main issue with this is that it's kind of an action without a counter. At it's heart I view Eve as a "rock/paper/scissors" type game. There is almost always a way to succeed (though you may not have the resources to make it happen).

In the case of this particular issue... there really isn't one. If you read the contract, check your access... do everything right... and then after you accept the contract your access gets dropped... you're left without options. The only way to "win" that exchange is to not play.

Having an exterior "drop box" (like you have at a library where you can drop your books off even when the building is not open)... seems to add that. You can still create contracts in low-sec or null and try to gank the delivery person... but it becomes a contest between the hauler and the ganker/contract maker... which is GREAT. What we have now doesn't add content... because the delivery man is unable to make the delivery.

And yes... it can be avoided by never taking a courier job delivering to a citadel. But that action (once everyone finally figures out that is the only response to this that will work) results in no courier deliveries to citadels being possible. I can't see how that is a good thing. If the successful action is to not play a part of the game... you have a problem.






Funny part about this is that at the other end, somebody was closely watching the contract, ready to click that button to deny access. Risk free and under the cover of safe mechanics.

Think about what kind of person that is, on the other end, who plays like that. Who is capable of sitting there watching text on a screen like that, finger poised on the button. Their brain actually get a dopamine dose from that. What kind of brain gets that dopamine from an action like that?
(hint: the kind that normal people won't pay to play with. In before "hurr durr normies")

As if mining and gate camping did not already prove mental health issues.

Even gankers garner more respect than this current ploy. They run a gauntlet in criminal status, take their chances, lose a ship, etc.

In the end this won't have much of an effect on haulers. They won't take citadel destined contracts. Then we'll see the Church of HTFU, ever lifeless and having nothing better to do, complaining about "risk averse highsec carebears" relying on NPC stations to take deliveries and how CPP needs to find a way to punish citadel owners who still take deliveries at NPC stations. Terrible friendless people as usual.


The answer to your question is... the guy with multiple accounts.

If it takes 15 minutes at top speed to make the delivery... the guy can plan with other accounts and click over to the contract scam screen every 10 minutes or so (or just have it on an extra monitor doing nothing while he plays on his other 37 monitors).
Scialt
Corporate Navy Police Force
#225 - 2017-05-24 18:10:04 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Scialt wrote:
Tricia Killnu wrote:
The citadel in question that's part of the scam can be destroyed.

Go destroy it. Get someone to destroy it.

PVP

Content

I just gave you

Please send me isk for such ideas you are all sweet things and you know you want to P


Doing so will still cost the hauler the collateral. It might make them feel better... but that's it.


Still a dead citadel and they will be added to the list of untrustworthy organisations/players.


Yes. They'll feel better.

They still lost the collateral. And unlike the person who took the contract... those defending the citadel have a chance to defend the citadel. The hauler doesn't have any opportunity to deliver the goods.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#226 - 2017-05-24 18:15:06 UTC
Scialt wrote:


Yes. They'll feel better.

They still lost the collateral. And unlike the person who took the contract... those defending the citadel have a chance to defend the citadel. The hauler doesn't have any opportunity to deliver the goods.


And?

Welcome to EVE, a game that allows you to scam, cheat and fight your way to victory.
Scialt
Corporate Navy Police Force
#227 - 2017-05-24 18:24:52 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Gimme Sake wrote:
Keno Skir wrote:


What like the one i've explained three times, just look back it's really easy..


I understand your point about allowing citadel access.

But...

What some people in this thread advice is "The counter is simple, don't accept citadel contracts." That's like telling a new player don't go to null there are bubbles instead of advising him to fit a ceptor. That's a bear set of mind.

For every form of pvp in the game there is an active way to counter it. If you get baited you can surprise the baiter, if you get dropped you can counter drop, to avoid gate camps you fit a cloak and a mwd or organise a drop...etc.

The drop box suggestion is a way to turn a contract scam into an active pvp element that implies some risk for the emitter. Perhaps there are better mechanics to be implemented if given a bit of thought.

There are still the major trade hubs local chats for "risk free" shennanigans.



p.s. I can come up with the same argument, if you dont want to give everyone access to your stuff then don't emit public contracts.


Can we say way over simplified.

The solution is thus: IF you do not want that kind of risk, then do not take that kind of risk.

The point is each player should evaluate how much risk they want and are willing to take on and then act accordingly.

And no, not every form of PvP has an active counter.


I'm curious.... what doesn't?

damage -> tank
damps -> sebos
ECM -> ECCM, sebos, signal amps
tracking disruption -> tracking computers/enhancers
painters -> More tank
warp scram/disrupt -> wcs
web -> ECM/MJD/MWD/AB
cyno -> cyno jammer

Being .01 isked in the market -> .01 isking them right back
high sec suicide ganks -> more tank/bring friends
can flipping -> kill flipper
bubble -> nullification
cloak -> get close enough to deactivate cloak

Not all counters are easy... it's hard to locate and bump an off grid cloaked camper... but it's possible. It would require an incredible amount of luck to drop a bookmark and warp to a random safe spot and then bump the cloaked camper. The realistic chance to actually do so if you do so is almost non-existant... but it's not impossible.

But delivering a contract when the person locks you out of the delivery destination... is not possible at all.
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#228 - 2017-05-24 18:30:45 UTC
Coralas wrote:

The price for high collateral hauls are higher than low collateral hauls because less pilots can take them.
The price for hauls to citadels will probably also wind up higher than hauls to stations.
A higher price matters not in the least.

If there is a mechanic in place that allows the possibility for you to lose your collateral with no way to avoid it, you have to assume that every contract is a scam. So people stop accepting haul to citadel runs. Period.

No biggie for the haulers. But not so great for the citadel owners. They'd kind of like to have a viable enterprise running. It's why they set one up in the first place.

Mr Epeen Cool
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#229 - 2017-05-24 18:41:49 UTC
Scialt wrote:


But delivering a contract when the person locks you out of the delivery destination... is not possible at all.


A thing that has happened from the dawn of owing a station out in null, why should anything change now especially now that the station in question can be destroyed fairly easily?

This is about the only risk a highsec hauler will ever face running contracts and it only works once.
Keno Skir
#230 - 2017-05-24 18:52:41 UTC
Gimme Sake wrote:
Keno Skir wrote:


What like the one i've explained three times, just look back it's really easy..


I understand your point about allowing citadel access.

But...

What some people in this thread advice is "The counter is simple, don't accept citadel contracts." That's like telling a new player don't go to null there are bubbles instead of advising him to fit a ceptor. That's a bear set of mind.

For every form of pvp in the game there is an active way to counter it. If you get baited you can surprise the baiter, if you get dropped you can counter drop, to avoid gate camps you fit a cloak and a mwd or organise a drop...etc.

The drop box suggestion is a way to turn a contract scam into an active pvp element that implies some risk for the emitter. Perhaps there are better mechanics to be implemented if given a bit of thought.

There are still the major trade hubs local chats for "risk free" shennanigans.



p.s. I can come up with the same argument, if you dont want to give everyone access to your stuff then don't emit public contracts.


What? That argument has nothing to do with anything i said.

My workaround is to take your alt to the destination before accepting the contract, while citadel still open. Once you accept contract and citadel docking access is revoked you still have a man on the inside. A quick contract means your unknown alt can move the package into space for you, and you can gobble up that nasty scammer's ISK.

You and others keep suggesting that there is no risk / work for the scammer, and no way around the issue for the target. Both of your points are wholly incorrect and are the reason you aren't being taken seriously. The scam is easy to avoid, to the point ANYONE can scam the scammers if they want. The scammer has to erect a Billion ISK Structure which is absolutely risk, probably more risk than the haulers are taking to be honest.

Black Lanterns Blog <- Read my ramblings -.-

250,000 Bonus SP when you start an Alpha Clone HERE <---
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#231 - 2017-05-24 19:00:24 UTC
Scialt wrote:


Being .01 isked in the market -> .01 isking them right back
high sec suicide ganks -> more tank/bring friends
cloak -> get close enough to deactivate cloak


The first 2 are indirect, not direct. I am not taking down his orders or stopping him from changing them, etc. As for ganking again that is indirect, adding tank may make you uneconomical to gank. It is not direct, it induces the gankers to look elsewhere for prey. And how are you going to get near a cloaked ship at a safe? The solutions there (to AFK cloaking) are generally indirect such as moving over a system, ratting in a group, etc.

So nope, not all PvP has a direct counter.

"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
#232 - 2017-05-24 19:01:43 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
Coralas wrote:

The price for high collateral hauls are higher than low collateral hauls because less pilots can take them.
The price for hauls to citadels will probably also wind up higher than hauls to stations.
A higher price matters not in the least.

If there is a mechanic in place that allows the possibility for you to lose your collateral with no way to avoid it, you have to assume that every contract is a scam. So people stop accepting haul to citadel runs. Period.

No biggie for the haulers. But not so great for the citadel owners. They'd kind of like to have a viable enterprise running. It's why they set one up in the first place.

Mr Epeen Cool


No you don't. You can take a risk. If you are that afraid of loss, log out and uninstall the game. Then go hide under the covers. P

"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
Scialt
Corporate Navy Police Force
#233 - 2017-05-24 19:05:13 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Scialt wrote:


But delivering a contract when the person locks you out of the delivery destination... is not possible at all.


A thing that has happened from the dawn of owing a station out in null, why should anything change now especially now that the station in question can be destroyed fairly easily?

This is about the only risk a highsec hauler will ever face running contracts and it only works once.


Using "this is the way it always worked" as a reason is kind of a weak argument. If your main defense for something is essentially... "tradition"... it means that you probably don't have a good argument.

The dynamics changed because with citadels, deliveries could be contracted to player owned structures outside of Null. Other than Providence (and maybe a couple of other places I'm not aware of) most player owned stations are pretty much inaccessible to begin with to anyone not already allied with that alliance.

The current setup isn't good... on two fronts.

1. As it is, the ability to lock out those making deliveries (and the scams built around that ability) make it difficult if not impossible to get a hauling contract accepted to a citadel. This hurts those who would like to use courier contracts to supply their citadels who would prefer to have other players willing to accept their contracts.

2. The ability to foil a delivery by not allowing them to dock can not be countered in any way... other than by never accepting a citadel courier mission (which feeds back to 1).

Having an exterior delivery container seems like something that could be implemented relatively easily (given that we have similar mechanics already in the game). I don't really see how this hurts anyone other than people running one particular scam. It helps both haulers and citadel owners who are not scamming. It could conceivably help pirates who would get more traffic from haulers in low-sec (though it remains to be seen if haulers would make the deliveries under any circumstances... I'm curious how much courier contract traffic goes to low-sec NPC stations).

I guess the question is... what's the downside? "Tradition?"
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#234 - 2017-05-24 19:06:55 UTC
Here is an example of "Hurr durr HTFU and deal with it".

Notice how that different that is from say, the current f**kery on which this thread is about? Notice the difference in content? The difference in results?

Tell me, which kind of scam contract has "a counter hurr durr and content marsha marsha marsha" and which one does not?


Now, is this going to be all about the usual crowd of lowlifes getting protected by game mechanics and CCP? It's bad enough nothing was done about bumping, but the Highsec Militia appears to have adapted (more "hurr durr HTFU" for you) , and what can be done about someone safely clicking a button in a station somewhere?

If this new "scam" (which is hardly a real scam because real scams rely on actually fooling someone) is left untreated, it will only add to the already problem that lowlife gameplay is "protected". People don't want to pay to play in a game where they cannot adapt and overcome.

Haulers will adapt eventually. Citadels won't get delivered to. Some people around here will get their little dopamine shot if they read about some citadel owner complaining. All this for unbalanced people.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Scialt
Corporate Navy Police Force
#235 - 2017-05-24 19:13:09 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Scialt wrote:


Being .01 isked in the market -> .01 isking them right back
high sec suicide ganks -> more tank/bring friends
cloak -> get close enough to deactivate cloak


The first 2 are indirect, not direct. I am not taking down his orders or stopping him from changing them, etc. As for ganking again that is indirect, adding tank may make you uneconomical to gank. It is not direct, it induces the gankers to look elsewhere for prey. And how are you going to get near a cloaked ship at a safe? The solutions there (to AFK cloaking) are generally indirect such as moving over a system, ratting in a group, etc.

So nope, not all PvP has a direct counter.


You said "active counter".

.01 isking the other guy is an active counter. The point of .01 isking someone is to have the best buy/sell price. So by actively changing my buy/sell price... I've countered his move.

Increasing your tank is also an active counter. I could have 20 remote repping alts that swoop in and repair my freighter... and as long as I can tank the damage longer than it takes concord to wipe you out... I win the encounter. Yes... they can keep re-shipping... and I can keep calling in remote reppers. They can target my repair ships... and I can bring damage dealing ships in. A counter EXISTS. It might be const prohibative. I might not have enough resources/friends/accounts to pull it off realistically... but it is POSSIBLE for the freighter to win against a gank attempt.

How is it possible to make a delivery to a citadel if they lock you out after you accept?
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#236 - 2017-05-24 19:24:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
If people spent half as much time trying to figure it out as they do complaining they wouldn't need to complain.

Have any of the complainers tried handing the cargo over to an alt or trusted friend that still has docking rights, having them use the delivery system to put the cargo in your hanger in the citadel then completing the contract remotely?
This is of course on top of all the other things you could do like doing some homework on the citadel owner, or not taking contracts to citadels you don't know and so on.

The principle here is USE THE TOOLS YOU HAVE FIRST, run to the forums and ask for mommy intervention later (better: not at all, because you're a grown man and are expected to figure things out for yourself) Learn the game, learn the ins and outs, think outside the box, learn to screw over the screw over people.

But above all stop being pathetic. Start seeing the scammers and gankers etc etc as people who need punishing (by you if no one else), and understand that the game has all the tools you need to do it. A poster just posted where the "High Sec militia" defeated a scam. Can not the militia be used to kill known scammer citadels?

Can no one think for themselves today? Would a participation trophy help spur some of you people to help yourselves, because i'm sure I can find some online somewhere.
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#237 - 2017-05-24 19:24:14 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Mr Epeen wrote:
Coralas wrote:

The price for high collateral hauls are higher than low collateral hauls because less pilots can take them.
The price for hauls to citadels will probably also wind up higher than hauls to stations.
A higher price matters not in the least.

If there is a mechanic in place that allows the possibility for you to lose your collateral with no way to avoid it, you have to assume that every contract is a scam. So people stop accepting haul to citadel runs. Period.

No biggie for the haulers. But not so great for the citadel owners. They'd kind of like to have a viable enterprise running. It's why they set one up in the first place.

Mr Epeen Cool


No you don't. You can take a risk. If you are that afraid of loss, log out and uninstall the game. Then go hide under the covers. P
Sometimes you are such a doofus.

You've been around long enough to know that the name of the game is minimizing risk. If, as a little bee, your experience is hiding under the covers, then so be it.

High sec couriers don't do that. They learn to spot a scam and avoid it. If there is a mechanic in which a scam can't be spotted then you minimize risk by avoiding it altogether. That's not fear. It's good gameplay.

Mr Epeen Cool
Gimme Sake
State War Academy
Caldari State
#238 - 2017-05-24 19:31:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Gimme Sake
Keno Skir wrote:


What? That argument has nothing to do with anything i said.

My workaround is to take your alt to the destination before accepting the contract, while citadel still open. Once you accept contract and citadel docking access is revoked you still have a man on the inside. A quick contract means your unknown alt can move the package into space for you, and you can gobble up that nasty scammer's ISK.

You and others keep suggesting that there is no risk / work for the scammer, and no way around the issue for the target. Both of your points are wholly incorrect and are the reason you aren't being taken seriously. The scam is easy to avoid, to the point ANYONE can scam the scammers if they want. The scammer has to erect a Billion ISK Structure which is absolutely risk, probably more risk than the haulers are taking to be honest.



Anyone with hauling experinece else can confirm this? Because maybe the citadel was never open to beggin so. Maybe there's a sick little person there that only opens it to certain players in certain circumstances.

Because if planting an alt or friend there that can pull that maneuver is valid game play option I'm totally fine with it.

"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#239 - 2017-05-24 20:02:24 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Mr Epeen wrote:
Coralas wrote:

The price for high collateral hauls are higher than low collateral hauls because less pilots can take them.
The price for hauls to citadels will probably also wind up higher than hauls to stations.
A higher price matters not in the least.

If there is a mechanic in place that allows the possibility for you to lose your collateral with no way to avoid it, you have to assume that every contract is a scam. So people stop accepting haul to citadel runs. Period.

No biggie for the haulers. But not so great for the citadel owners. They'd kind of like to have a viable enterprise running. It's why they set one up in the first place.

Mr Epeen Cool


No you don't. You can take a risk. If you are that afraid of loss, log out and uninstall the game. Then go hide under the covers. P
Sometimes you are such a doofus.

You've been around long enough to know that the name of the game is minimizing risk. If, as a little bee, your experience is hiding under the covers, then so be it.

High sec couriers don't do that. They learn to spot a scam and avoid it. If there is a mechanic in which a scam can't be spotted then you minimize risk by avoiding it altogether. That's not fear. It's good gameplay.

Mr Epeen Cool


Wrong. Somebody had to be the first one to go to a citadel and take that risk. There is, apparently, a list of citadels you can deliver too (i.e. do not revoke access).

"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
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#240 - 2017-05-24 20:16:03 UTC
Scialt wrote:



The dynamics changed because with citadels, deliveries could be contracted to player owned structures outside of Null. Other than Providence (and maybe a couple of other places I'm not aware of) most player owned stations are pretty much inaccessible to begin with to anyone not already allied with that alliance.


Didn't stop the exact same scams, VFK was notorious for that. Its exactly the same thing' the only difference is you can blow up the offending highsec station fairly easily. AKA it has a consequence for the scammer.


Scialt wrote:

1. As it is, the ability to lock out those making deliveries (and the scams built around that ability) make it difficult if not impossible to get a hauling contract accepted to a citadel. This hurts those who would like to use courier contracts to supply their citadels who would prefer to have other players willing to accept their contracts.


Given that the vast bulk of manufacturing is now done in citadels getting deliveries isn't hard.

Scialt wrote:

2. The ability to foil a delivery by not allowing them to dock can not be countered in any way... other than by never accepting a citadel courier mission (which feeds back to 1).


Not everything needs a direct counter. Scams only work once and can be sniffed out fairly easily.

Scialt wrote:

Having an exterior delivery container seems like something that could be implemented relatively easily (given that we have similar mechanics already in the game). I don't really see how this hurts anyone other than people running one particular scam.

I guess the question is... what's the downside? "Tradition?"


Eliminating content just so you don't have to put in any effort or face any risk is not good for the game. We need more content not less and yes, this scam is content.