These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev Blog: Shake my Citadel

First post First post
Author
Yroc Jannseen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#781 - 2015-05-31 14:16:46 UTC
I don't recall if it's been mentioned yet, but will the Player Conquerable Stations eventually be removed with Player Built Outposts?
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#782 - 2015-05-31 16:29:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Rain6637
Aker Krane wrote:
davet517 wrote:
[quote=Orm Magnustat]

It'd be nice to think that these changes will shake things up, but it's highly unlikely that they will. Nullsec is popuated with efficient bureaucrats and politicians now, though they like to pretend to be warlords from time to time. The wars, such as they are, are just theater for the masses. Are you not entertained?


Amen

If you knew CCP paid our SRP out of confiscated RMT funds, you wouldn't be so calm about it. Yes I'm entertained.

I expect a warning from CCP Falcon, not ISD, for rumor mongering. That was a good one.



I don't get the warm fuzzies from the thought of destructible everything, and am pretty sure I will only commit to what I can log off in space if nothing else changes. Accepting that, we can start to discuss the best way to destroy hoarders' stuff.

I think the best solution is turning destroyed structures and all their contents into balls of harvestable gas and molten-then-solid materials. Zero loss, but then it requires mining lasers and gas harvesters, and salvaging lasers to recover.

This iteration of my destructible structures suggestion supersedes my previous suggestions.
davet517
Raata Invicti
#783 - 2015-05-31 18:02:23 UTC  |  Edited by: davet517
Rain6637 wrote:


I don't get the warm fuzzies from the thought of destructible everything, and am pretty sure I will only commit to what I can log off in space if nothing else changes. Accepting that, we can start to discuss the best way to destroy hoarders' stuff.

I think the best solution is turning destroyed structures and all their contents into balls of harvestable gas and molten-then-solid materials. Zero loss, but then it requires mining lasers and gas harvesters, and salvaging lasers to recover.


The present solution is fine. Want your stuff? Organize a fleet to go get it, or try to ninja it out. There should be a time limit on it though. A month or two, then it goes poof. Don't want the galaxy littered with just for you cans everywhere you look.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#784 - 2015-06-01 00:41:23 UTC
davet517 wrote:
Rain6637 wrote:


I don't get the warm fuzzies from the thought of destructible everything, and am pretty sure I will only commit to what I can log off in space if nothing else changes. Accepting that, we can start to discuss the best way to destroy hoarders' stuff.

I think the best solution is turning destroyed structures and all their contents into balls of harvestable gas and molten-then-solid materials. Zero loss, but then it requires mining lasers and gas harvesters, and salvaging lasers to recover.


The present solution is fine. Want your stuff? Organize a fleet to go get it, or try to ninja it out. There should be a time limit on it though. A month or two, then it goes poof. Don't want the galaxy littered with just for you cans everywhere you look.

Yeah that will work. No industry, minimal items on local markets, no-one keeping more than they can carry in a fast hauler.

Don't go on vacation or get sick or go somewhere for work you have no internet access, without 1st evacuating everything you own to an NPC station because you'll come back to the game with nothing.

Destructible stations is possibly the best direction to take for, elitist mega groups only, in nulsec.


My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#785 - 2015-06-01 01:22:43 UTC
Revenants are being welped on purpose now, so I suppose we need a new source of schadenfreude.
davet517
Raata Invicti
#786 - 2015-06-01 11:48:37 UTC  |  Edited by: davet517
Sgt Ocker wrote:


Don't go on vacation or get sick or go somewhere for work you have no internet access, without 1st evacuating everything you own to an NPC station because you'll come back to the game with nothing.

Destructible stations is possibly the best direction to take for, elitist mega groups only, in nulsec.



Yes. To the extent that mega-groups form and can be politically stable, they're going to dominate sovereign nullsec. As long as players want to feel powerful, and join mega-groups because they do, that's going to continue. That's the sov game. It's the part of eve for those who make a hard-core commitment to the game. If you aren't interested in making that kind of commitment, or can't, there are plenty of other ways to play the game.

I think you're looking at the "coming back to the game with nothing" part all wrong. Its a good thing. You get busted out, and you start over. It'd be pretty cool to see Mittani and Grath out running level 4s because they had lost all of their stuff. Right now, that's not really possible. Most of the stuff that players like that have is invulnerable.

The one way accumulation of invulnerable wealth does not benefit the "little guy", as you seem to think it does. It benefits we old-timers. Look at Red Alliance in the south, coming back from years of relative inactivity to take their old stomping grounds back in a short time. They couldn't have done that if they'd lost most of their stuff, along with their space. They were able to do it because they weren't starting over from scratch. They just picked up where they left off, with caches of wealth to support them.

As long as so much accumulated wealth remains invulnerable, you'll continue to see the same names dominating the map over and over. You'll also see big entities fold and surrender space quickly, without much of a fight, when they meet a tough challenge, preferring to preserve their invulnerable wealth rather than fight. Much of that wealth needs to get destroyed if 0.0 is going to break out of its current stagnation and experience any meaningful renewal.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#787 - 2015-06-01 11:52:42 UTC
What happens to the capsuleers who logged off in station? Or were sitting in T3s at the time.
davet517
Raata Invicti
#788 - 2015-06-01 12:38:38 UTC  |  Edited by: davet517
Rain6637 wrote:
What happens to the capsuleers who logged off in station? Or were sitting in T3s at the time.


They wake up in a wrecked station and can undock, but not re-dock, as I understand it. Not any different from logging off at a POS today that gets destroyed while you're gone, except that you are invulnerable until you decide to undock.

What would happen if you were gone for an extended period and the wreck de-spawned? You'd wake up in a pod in high-sec somewhere, I guess. For a rank-and-file player, it isn't all that different from coming back to find yourself in a hostile station.

Long ago, you always kept a mission boat and some basic stuff in high-sec so that you could start over if you came out on the wrong end of a sov fight. Evaccing your stuff might be hard or impossible. With the proliferation of stations, jump drives, and jump clones we've gotten spoiled over the years. We feel like we're entitled never to lose our stuff, even when we lose space. Consequently, many wars fizzle out before they even get started. It's too easy just to fold, and save your assets.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#789 - 2015-06-01 13:13:40 UTC
Brother, I know it. It's not long ago... more like earlier today. I learned that our POS was lost while reading a TMC article, and logged in to reposition my gang that was logged in the forcefield.

I also keep not only a mission boat but a complete character that could be called a main (for thorough skills) in high sec just in case, and for boredom. My point is I'm unaffected by destructible-everything, with utility characters and the ability to source everything I need from Jita, with the exception of the occasional capital ship.

I agree with you that it's no big deal for some of us, who only buy what they can fly and only fly what they can afford to lose. But I'm talking about the industrialists who would be left holding the bag.

As long as there are wormholes that can handle my resupply and reshipping needs, the shooter's fate is not tied to the industrialist's, when it needs to be, in a system where assets are permanently at stake.

For my risk to even begin to rival the industrialist's risk in a destructible-everything EVE, I would have to lose the safety of logging off.

Destructible-everything is more of a reset button, than a self-destruct [EVE] button, and as quiet as this topic is, you would think CCP wanted to call a mulligan on the last decade of the player economy, and that players were OK with it.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#790 - 2015-06-01 13:26:49 UTC
davet517 wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:


Don't go on vacation or get sick or go somewhere for work you have no internet access, without 1st evacuating everything you own to an NPC station because you'll come back to the game with nothing.

Destructible stations is possibly the best direction to take for, elitist mega groups only, in nulsec.



Yes. To the extent that mega-groups form and can be politically stable, they're going to dominate sovereign nullsec. As long as players want to feel powerful, and join mega-groups because they do, that's going to continue. That's the sov game. It's the part of eve for those who make a hard-core commitment to the game. If you aren't interested in making that kind of commitment, or can't, there are plenty of other ways to play the game.

I think you're looking at the "coming back to the game with nothing" part all wrong. Its a good thing. You get busted out, and you start over. It'd be pretty cool to see Mittani and Grath out running level 4s because they had lost all of their stuff. Right now, that's not really possible. Most of the stuff that players like that have is invulnerable.

The one way accumulation of invulnerable wealth does not benefit the "little guy", as you seem to think it does. It benefits we old-timers. Look at Red Alliance in the south, coming back from years of relative inactivity to take their old stomping grounds back in a short time. They couldn't have done that if they'd lost most of their stuff, along with their space. They were able to do it because they weren't starting over from scratch. They just picked up where they left off, with caches of wealth to support them.

As long as so much accumulated wealth remains invulnerable, you'll continue to see the same names dominating the map over and over. You'll also see big entities fold and surrender space quickly, without much of a fight, when they meet a tough challenge, preferring to preserve their invulnerable wealth rather than fight. Much of that wealth needs to get destroyed if 0.0 is going to break out of its current stagnation and experience any meaningful renewal.

I'm interested..
Where in FozzieSov do you see the large dominating groups become vulnerable?
FozzieSov is designed to give them every benefit with no drawbacks.

The only ones who risk "getting busted out" are the smaller and any new groups that believe fozziesov will enable change.

"Busting" the likes of Mittens and Grath is not possible now and it won't be with citadels and the pretend sov changes. FozzieSov does nothing to address the distribution of wealth, it is simply a pseudo balance to sov. Changes the way sov is taken (much easier for large established groups to boot new comers) while not changing, the way sov is taken. Meaning; The larger and more established the group the easier to maintain current sov.

The only thing FozzieSov really does, is remove long drawn out structure shoots. It doesn't remove hours of grinding (it brings an all new type of endless grinding), it doesn't affect the ease with which blob fleets dominate, it doesn't offer new groups a reason to enter the sov mini game.
Basically Fozziesov offers so little, it was quietly dropped from tomorrows update.

Using entosis links used on station services will provide a little content for a few months, for those who will bother risking lossmails for no other reason than to force someone to run an entosis link for half the time they did to undo what they achieved.

The recent activity we have seen in sov can be attributed to Fozziesov. Groups positioning themselves for the future of nice easy to defend sov. By the time the rest of fozzies proposal hits TQ (if it does) all the existing groups will have maxed out defensive indexes and so, nothing to fear from fozzies whack a mole mini games.

You are right, the accumulated wealth does need to be broken up, FozzieSov is not going to do that though and with CCP's track record for change, it will be another 4 or more years before anyone has another try.

Just one last thing, the "accumulated wealth" will just get moved from vulnerable Citadels to nice secure stations. So even if you did manage to destroy the home of one of the mega groups you would achieve little more than disrupting the line members for a few days. The rich didn't get that way by risking what they have in vulnerable places.

NB; Mittani hasn't logged into the game in about 4 years, can't see him ever needing to again, as long as Goons exist, his future (in and out of game) is pretty secure.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#791 - 2015-06-01 13:35:02 UTC
Couple things.

What was removed from the update might have something to do with the strike that sort of happened. The preliminary strike, but short of the perpetual one set to start on the 6th.

Just in case you're not familiar, this avatar pose and background, and jacket suggests I'm a Reaver. We're no secret now, and neither is how we get our jollies--by threatening people's stuff.

Nomadic, slippery, self-sustained... the only resupply we need from the outside is ISK, and that happens remotely.

I'm glad I'm not the one to claim it, because bias and the source and all: I'm not concerned about us, and not for some type of blind loyalty. It's just that this group exceeds the organizational level required by destructible-everything. With no hard ties between shooters and industrialists, a group needs the capability to order offense or defense with no immediate reasons given, or direct causality.

That's the standard that destructible-everything will set, and a lot of groups won't make the cut.
Suede
State War Academy
Caldari State
#792 - 2015-06-01 15:20:29 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Gabriel Karade wrote:
So, still curious for a response; what sort of 'racial'/faction flavouring will there be?...

...hoping it doesn't involve "Good idea! Lets shaft Gallente again!"


Each class of structure (ie Citadel, Drilling Platform, Observatory) will belong to an NPC corporation which technically belong to a faction, but you wont see the usual Amarr, Minmatar, Caldari, Gallente stylings. We are creating a new style for each which more accurately reflects their purpose.

With that said, we are leaving the option open to have variations within each class + size, but only where we think we can give them meaningful bonuses.

Edit: I listed Gallente last :tinfoil:



will you make Citadel flyable so can warp them about, fly them bit like Star Trek Deep Space Nine
as it could move
davet517
Raata Invicti
#793 - 2015-06-01 15:26:35 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
What was removed from the update might have something to do with the strike that sort of happened. The preliminary strike, but short of the perpetual one set to start on the 6th.


Being in software development myself I'd say it's more likely that they just ran into some show-stopper bugs or potential exploits that block the release of it. I think it's pretty wild that they just drop something that major from a release without a word, though. Everyone's been sitting on their hands for a while now waiting on this. Looks like the waiting will continue.

Quote:
Just in case you're not familiar, this avatar pose and background, and jacket suggests I'm a Reaver. We're no secret now, and neither is how we get our jollies--by threatening people's stuff.

Nomadic, slippery, self-sustained... the only resupply we need from the outside is ISK, and that happens remotely.


As a firefly fan, I find it a little strange having a reasonably rational conversation with a reaver, but, a nomadic life of threatening people's stuff sounds like fun. Good luck with that.

Quote:
I'm glad I'm not the one to claim it, because bias and the source and all: I'm not concerned about us, and not for some type of blind loyalty. It's just that this group exceeds the organizational level required by destructible-everything. With no hard ties between shooters and industrialists, a group needs the capability to order offense or defense with no immediate reasons given, or direct causality.


But you do have a direct link. You mentioned it above: Isk. Without a centralized banking system, and common currency, the flow of isk from the outside on which you depend wouldn't be possible. It's the reason that NBSI as we know it can exist. Imagine if each sovereign entity had to establish and manage their own currencies, and collect taxes in that currency.

Domestic consumption, production, and trade with other sovereign entities would all become far more important than they are now. It would also open the possibility of forex trading, and more or less cut off those who rely on RMT for real life income from deriving that income from their alliance holdings, except to the extent that people wanted to buy their sovereign currency for real money. That sovereign currency would also become worthless if the sovereign entity was conquered.

It would make the game far more interesting, and dynamic, but it would also upset various stakeholders, for obvious reasons.
davet517
Raata Invicti
#794 - 2015-06-01 16:08:05 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
[
I'm interested..
Where in FozzieSov do you see the large dominating groups become vulnerable?
FozzieSov is designed to give them every benefit with no drawbacks.


It made them far more vulnerable to harassment it its original form than it does now, but even now, it has caused them to rethink vast rental holdings and the amount of space that they intend to try to defend. I think that some of them are thinking that they'll position hardened entities around their borders to protect a soft renter middle, but still, it's an improvement from vast sections of the map being rented out.

Quote:
The only ones who risk "getting busted out" are the smaller and any new groups that believe fozziesov will enable change.


That's true. Small, unaligned entities who try to take space will undoubtedly get crapped on by the blocs and their attack dogs, just because they can. Straight up extortion may replace rent as an income source.

Quote:
"Busting" the likes of Mittens and Grath is not possible now and it won't be with citadels and the pretend sov changes. FozzieSov does nothing to address the distribution of wealth, it is simply a pseudo balance to sov. Changes the way sov is taken (much easier for large established groups to boot new comers) while not changing, the way sov is taken. Meaning; The larger and more established the group the easier to maintain current sov.


Fozziesov doesn't. Getting rid of indestructible stations would be a step in that direction. It wouldn't do it alone. You'd also most likely have to break up the universal banking system, so that currency had to be transported from time to time too.

Quote:
The only thing FozzieSov really does, is remove long drawn out structure shoots. It doesn't remove hours of grinding (it brings an all new type of endless grinding), it doesn't affect the ease with which blob fleets dominate, it doesn't offer new groups a reason to enter the sov mini game.

The recent activity we have seen in sov can be attributed to Fozziesov. Groups positioning themselves for the future of nice easy to defend sov. By the time the rest of fozzies proposal hits TQ (if it does) all the existing groups will have maxed out defensive indexes and so, nothing to fear from fozzies whack a mole mini games.


I don't think that's true. Its making it possible to threaten undefended sov in a meaningful way without having to escalate to capitals, drawing an opposing or third party super-capital response. The "nuclear deterrent" of massive super-cap blobs has contributed quite a bit to the current stagnant state.

You've seen power blocs abandon entire regions, give up renter empires, and consolidate entities. All of which they would not have done otherwise.

In my opinion, the balance that they need to achieve is making it just as much fun to attack a power bloc as it is to be in one. Not more fun, but not less either. Right now, being in a power bloc kind of rules, and attacking one kind of sucks. Being in one needs to rule less, and being a small, nimble entity attacking one needs to suck less. There's a lot about fozziesov that I don't like, but, it is at least an acknowledgement that there is a problem. They need to keep iterating on it until they achieve that balance.

Quote:
NB; Mittani hasn't logged into the game in about 4 years, can't see him ever needing to again, as long as Goons exist, his future (in and out of game) is pretty secure.


Hopefully he won't wake up one day and wish that he'd done more with his life. That would be a shame.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#795 - 2015-06-01 18:56:15 UTC
Perhaps what I should have said was direct ISK interdependency.
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#796 - 2015-06-02 12:10:20 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Gabriel Karade wrote:
So, still curious for a response; what sort of 'racial'/faction flavouring will there be?...

...hoping it doesn't involve "Good idea! Lets shaft Gallente again!"


Each class of structure (ie Citadel, Drilling Platform, Observatory) will belong to an NPC corporation which technically belong to a faction, but you wont see the usual Amarr, Minmatar, Caldari, Gallente stylings. We are creating a new style for each which more accurately reflects their purpose.

With that said, we are leaving the option open to have variations within each class + size, but only where we think we can give them meaningful bonuses.

Edit: I listed Gallente last :tinfoil:


Excellent.

Serpentis Drug Laboratory, yes? Gib. Big smile
Qia Kare
Starlight Corp
Starlight Federation
#797 - 2015-06-03 09:16:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Qia Kare
I would very much like to see some sort of hanger that can be shared with all players who have access to a structure.

My personal goal with the structures is to run some sort of player owned hub for the public good, or at least a hub for the good of those people I choose to share it with.

I make my home in hisec and I find I meet a fair number of fledgeling players who are just getting their feet wet in EVE. I wouldn't call myself a veteran, or even a particularly serious player, but I do like to share knowledge of the game's basic principles, handy basic skills to train, and provide entry level ships or equipment that I can fairly easily make, find, or buy and transport back to base. I would love to be able to stock some skill books, ships (even better if I can fit them), and a smattering of parts and ammunition for these people to experiment without having to coerce them into joining my corporation so they can access a shared hanger, and I'd like them to be able to experiment on their own with a wide variety of fittings without duplicating a big box of spare parts and ammo across every player I meet.

Being able to form some kind of trust based relationship with players who are already committed to other corporations, or who like to do things independently on their own terms would go a long way towards making my EVE more social. Plus, letting newbies blow up my assets has got to be good for player retention and the EVE economy.

As an addendum, stuff in this public hanger could be scannable and have a chance to drop rather than be covered by 100% asset safety. I'm not certain if that's a good idea, as it would discourage people from using it, but on the other hand it might give people a reason to squabble over them or shoot down derelicts. My primary interest, though, is in how I can use these structures to increase the level of social interaction with my fellow EVE players and I think any shareable space, no matter how limited, insecure, or vulnerable, is important for me to realize that objective.
Colonel Tosh
The MorningStar. Syndicate
#798 - 2015-06-03 11:11:21 UTC
Structures won't be able to shoot without someone manning the guns. As CCP Nullarbor mentioned, we have options under our sleeves to mitigate the risk from this change. Like having a reduced vulnerability window in specific areas, and / or be able to have NPCs spawn.


What would this mean for wormhole space where the ability to shoot aggressors while you scramble will be an important deterrent, especially considering balancing? And on the flipside, how would vulnerability affect gameplay in w-space? Right now I could grab a fleet and reinforce their system whenever we're rolling into them, but after the patch it seems we're bound to a vulnerability window that greatly reduces the aggressors chances of clearing out towers in a system which shouldn't have any (such as staging towers) outside our own?
Draahk Chimera
Supervillains
#799 - 2015-06-09 10:53:30 UTC
So it's been a while and I don't know if any devs are still reading the thread or not but I have a few concerns/questions.

1. With the anchoring restrictions removed will the nullbear empires be able to build Dyson Spheres around every harvestable moon under their control? Or will there be a restriction of 1 moon harvest module per moon maximum or whatever?

2. Having the tax income from Jita market is going to be the largest single income in game for any alliance that can control it. Have you given any thought to the effect on the market when the 4-5 strongest alliances goes to perpetual war with eachother in a 250km sphere around Jita 4-4? While I realize this sounds fun and EVE-y it might have far reaching economic implications for every other player in the game, who might not find it very fun.

3. How will you handle alts in W-space? As it is now all my characters can have access to the same hangars to use ships and take out or put in items. If personal hangars are introduced there is going to be a whole lot of hazzle. Not to mention if I happen to have same-account alts since (I hope) there are no contracts in W-space.

404 - Image not found

Sean Roach
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#800 - 2015-06-09 19:36:01 UTC
I had a wild idea.
Those reclaim cans that a trashed station are possibly supposed to spew out?
Set them invulnerable, (and invisible to other players,) for one week. Free. Easy to find in the system you lost it in. Possibly even broken into smaller packages, scattered about, for easier pickup and ship-out.

After one week, move all that stuff ONE jump toward high-sec, and place a 10% "salvage fee" on the estimated value of the hanger contents, to activate it so you can get it. Still invisible until you visit. A notification should inform you of the new cost. Payment can be rendered on warp-to, (at the same time the can becomes "real" to everyone else).

One week later, move it all ONE MORE jump toward high-sec, and up that salvage fee, say to 15%, (5 plus 5 for every jump inward). How much of null is within 19 jumps of high?

When it hits a system with an indestructible NPC station, transfer this salvage from a floating can in space, to an Item Transfer Contract. At this point, it'll only jump when enough weeks have passed to get to the next NPC station in the shortest path toward high-sec. Defined as 0.5,

When it reaches High-Sec, and the nearest NPC station there, it becomes a permanent contract until reclaimed, for however much accrued through it's trip through low and null. If the nearest high-sec system somehow lacks a station, it'll keep jumping "inward" until one is found.

At each stage, the option should exist to "sell" the contract, converting it to 50% of its total value as ISK, possibly +/- some percentage, using the global price average, or mineral value, if you REALLY don't want to leak that value, (or are afraid some Goon player corp will manipulate the market to make the cans too expensive to reclaim..)

So, you lose a 1B can worth of stuff 15 jumps beyond high-sec, (and, for arguments sake, 5 jumps into SOV, with no stations except player built or controlled ones.) For 1 week, in the system, you can reclaim it. Free. Just find it on the scanner, or journal, and warp to it. No charge, except possibly your ship and pod if you're caught.
After a week, it'll cost you 100M to pick it up in the next system toward high.
After another week, it'll cost you 150M to pick it up in the next system toward high.
After five weeks, it hits its first NPC station, and it'll cost you (5+(jumps*5))%, 30% of the value of the goods, so 300M to claim.
Let's say the next system doesn't have a station, but the price continues to climb. You can pick it up in the same station for 350M in the next week.
So two weeks after it hit the last NPC station, (seven total), another NPC station is available. Pou can pick it up at an NPC station that's about 8 jumps from high, but it'll cost you 400M to collect now.

You wait until it hits the edge of high-sec, (or any time after that,) and it'll cost you 80% of its estimated value to reclaim. 800M.

Of course, at any time, you can give up and take the 50% payout offer. The stuff won't show up in market, but you'll get half market prices for it.

Just throwing this out there. It makes it expensive to not reclaim your stuff yourself, while allowing you to wait for it to come to you, if you have no other real option.

And some people may well pay 110% for their stuff back, after it flies 21 jumps inward. Especially if that stuff includes undervalued or irreplaceable items such as tournament rewards, (or T2 hulls, if mineral value is used, rather than market value, for the determination of reclaim fee. Plenty of opportunity to flex the market to drive the price of such cans up, or down, in either case.)

Further refinements.
It might be fair to tie this to the account, so if you're account is not active, it doesn't accrue further expense for lost stuff. But that lost stuff doesn't move from the system it was lost in, either, until you re-up. Then it starts moving (again), one system a week, just as if you lost it the day you paid the subscription.

The notice, and contract, should be globally linkable. They should ideally even be something that can be put in a contract themselves. You can't get your stuff before 10 jumps, and don't want to accept, or pay, 50% of it's value? Offer it to the conquering corp for 65%, or whatever seems reasonable to you, of its value. Now THEY can activate it, and "re"claim it. Or let it drift toward high.

Just linking it shouldn't make it activatable by others, but it gives you a means of certifying the "value" should you be selling it, or hiring a fleet to help you reclaim it. It would certainly be fair for the list of items to be in that link, as with any other contract, so whoever you're selling to, or hiring, can make their own evaluations of the value.