These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next page
 

August release - Contracts in Citadels

First post
Author
CCP Habakuk
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1 - 2016-07-29 14:23:31 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Habakuk
Hi,

The contract changes on Singularity are now ready for public testing. Please help us out and test your use cases for contracts and make sure that everything works as expected!
A devblog is currently being written, but here are the main changes:

Contracts in Citadels

  • All normal functionality of contracts should also work in Citadels
  • Accepting contracts in Citadels is on your own risk regarding docking access (see also next section) - there are appropriate warning messages displayed
  • Contract search: Contracts in Citadels without docking access are hidden by default (through the "exclude unreachable" filter)
  • Citadel explosion (+unanchoring): Active item exchange and auction contracts are being canceled, content moved to asset safety. The destination of courier contracts in progress is being moved to default asset safety location (except wormholes).


Planned, but not available yet

  • Notifications for canceled / modified contracts: Should be done next week
  • Ability to finish a contract from outside a citadel without docking access: Will very likely be added in a follow-up patch


Other related changes

  • It is now possible to search for Citadels (only citadels with docking access will be returned)
  • All citadels were renamed to include the system name
  • Increased contract limitations: Max courier contract size to 1,200,000m3, max item stacks from 200 to 500, max ISK value to 10 trillion


Known issues:

  • Missing text in popup for naming a Citadel the same as an existing Citadel
  • The default "Exclude unreachable" option is not properly displayed as checked
  • Unable to create a contract from the 1st division of a corp office in a citadel
  • Unable to create a contract in citadel through personal assets window, while being in a different system or docked in station
  • Right-clicking in space with an accepted courier contract is broken in some cases.

CCP Habakuk | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five 0 | (Team Gridlock)

Bug reporting | Mass Testing

Grookshank
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#2 - 2016-07-29 14:35:48 UTC
Max items (total) in a contract still caps at 2000. Can we get an increase to something like 5000?
Zappity
Exit-Strategy
Unchained Alliance
#3 - 2016-07-29 14:52:07 UTC
Grookshank wrote:
Max items (total) in a contract still caps at 2000. Can we get an increase to something like 5000?

I think you mean 200.

Very excited about this.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.

Grookshank
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#4 - 2016-07-29 14:55:53 UTC
Zappity wrote:
Grookshank wrote:
Max items (total) in a contract still caps at 2000. Can we get an increase to something like 5000?

I think you mean 200.

Very excited about this.

No I don't mean 200. Please read my post.
Zappity
Exit-Strategy
Unchained Alliance
#5 - 2016-07-29 15:25:49 UTC
Grookshank wrote:
Zappity wrote:
Grookshank wrote:
Max items (total) in a contract still caps at 2000. Can we get an increase to something like 5000?

I think you mean 200.

Very excited about this.

No I don't mean 200. Please read my post.

I did read your post. You can fit a lot more than 2000 items in a contract. I don't understand what you mean.

Increasing the stack cap upwards from 200 would be great.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.

Scotsman Howard
S0utherN Comfort
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#6 - 2016-07-29 15:32:26 UTC
Zappity wrote:
Grookshank wrote:
Zappity wrote:
Grookshank wrote:
Max items (total) in a contract still caps at 2000. Can we get an increase to something like 5000?

I think you mean 200.

Very excited about this.

No I don't mean 200. Please read my post.

I did read your post. You can fit a lot more than 2000 items in a contract. I don't understand what you mean.

Increasing the stack cap upwards from 200 would be great.


I agree with the 200 number. I am not sure where the 2000 came from. 1 item is a stack by itself. You can also ship hundreds of thousands of trit in one stack, so the 2000 number makes no sense.
helana Tsero
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#7 - 2016-07-29 15:46:09 UTC
CCP Habakuk wrote:
Hi,

Other related changes

  • All citadels were renamed to include the system name


Why ? Will just look stupid... alot of corps like their creative citadel names. Why are you ruining it ?

"...ppl need to get out of caves and they will see something new.... thats where eve is placed... not in cave."  | zoonr-Korsairs |

Meanwhile Citadel release issues: "tried to bug report this and the bug report is bugged as well" | Rafeau |

Sandor Neko
Planetary Interstellar Territorries
#8 - 2016-07-29 16:04:30 UTC
helana Tsero wrote:
CCP Habakuk wrote:
Hi,

Other related changes

  • All citadels were renamed to include the system name


Why ? Will just look stupid... alot of corps like their creative citadel names. Why are you ruining it ?


Because without that you write freeport in target citadel name and you get hundreds of results. Equivalent with other names too. There are not a lot of creative people around.
Zappity
Exit-Strategy
Unchained Alliance
#9 - 2016-07-29 16:13:41 UTC
Sandor Neko wrote:
helana Tsero wrote:
CCP Habakuk wrote:
Hi,

Other related changes

  • All citadels were renamed to include the system name


Why ? Will just look stupid... alot of corps like their creative citadel names. Why are you ruining it ?


Because without that you write freeport in target citadel name and you get hundreds of results. Equivalent with other names too. There are not a lot of creative people around.

Yep, necessary change.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.

CCP Habakuk
C C P
C C P Alliance
#10 - 2016-07-29 16:14:35 UTC
Sandor Neko wrote:
helana Tsero wrote:
CCP Habakuk wrote:
Hi,

Other related changes

  • All citadels were renamed to include the system name


Why ? Will just look stupid... alot of corps like their creative citadel names. Why are you ruining it ?


Because without that you write freeport in target citadel name and you get hundreds of results. Equivalent with other names too. There are not a lot of creative people around.


Yeah, this was mostly done to allow for searching for citadels consistently, but it also solves other problems and edge-cases (like some players being "too" creative with naming).

CCP Habakuk | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five 0 | (Team Gridlock)

Bug reporting | Mass Testing

CCP Habakuk
C C P
C C P Alliance
#11 - 2016-07-29 16:39:33 UTC
Scotsman Howard wrote:
I agree with the 200 number. I am not sure where the 2000 came from. 1 item is a stack by itself. You can also ship hundreds of thousands of trit in one stack, so the 2000 number makes no sense.


The 2000 limit is for the total amount of item stacks, including items within containers. I am personally a bit concerned about increasing this limit, as it would affect server and client performance.

CCP Habakuk | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five 0 | (Team Gridlock)

Bug reporting | Mass Testing

Messenger Of Truth
Butlerian Crusade
#12 - 2016-07-29 17:06:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Messenger Of Truth
I was hoping we'd see more flexibility with contract length. Sad Speed of delivery is sometimes really important.

The increased size limit is sensible, given the changes to freighters.

Trade Hub Price Checker: stop.hammerti.me.uk/pricecheck

Visit "Haulers Channel" in game for all matters courier-related.

Structure name/system API: stop.hammerti.me.uk/api

Wibla
Tactical Narcotics Team
#13 - 2016-07-29 17:06:45 UTC
CCP Habakuk wrote:
Scotsman Howard wrote:
I agree with the 200 number. I am not sure where the 2000 came from. 1 item is a stack by itself. You can also ship hundreds of thousands of trit in one stack, so the 2000 number makes no sense.


The 2000 limit is for the total amount of item stacks, including items within containers. I am personally a bit concerned about increasing this limit, as it would affect server and client performance.


You can always adjust this back down if it affects performance too much, though.

Will the Citadel name change mean that assets etc show up correctly in the API?
Kalbuir Skirate
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#14 - 2016-07-29 17:09:14 UTC
Woot!

When this goes out the door (given that the old functionality remains, i'll test this when I have time) all we really need is Assets in API for citadels. Then Horde never staging in a station ever again Cool.
CCP Habakuk
C C P
C C P Alliance
#15 - 2016-07-29 17:18:34 UTC
Messenger Of Truth wrote:
I was hoping we'd see more flexibility with contract length. Sad Speed of delivery is sometimes really important.

The increased size limit is sensible, given the changes to freighters.

Regarding contract length changes: It is not in this package, but we have also not decided against adding more options in the future. I think it would be best to post a good suggestion into the devblog thread, as soon as the devblog is out.

@Wibla: I am sure that it would not kill the server, but it would affect the performance negatively (I made some measurements already). Is there any specific reason, why you would like an increase in this limit?

CCP Habakuk | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five 0 | (Team Gridlock)

Bug reporting | Mass Testing

Lillian Dekar
Omni Galactic
Central Omni Galactic Group
#16 - 2016-07-29 17:26:49 UTC
CCP Habakuk wrote:
Messenger Of Truth wrote:
I was hoping we'd see more flexibility with contract length. Sad Speed of delivery is sometimes really important.

The increased size limit is sensible, given the changes to freighters.

Regarding contract length changes: It is not in this package, but we have also not decided against adding more options in the future. I think it would be best to post a good suggestion into the devblog thread, as soon as the devblog is out.

@Wibla: I am sure that it would not kill the server, but it would affect the performance negatively (I made some measurements already). Is there any specific reason, why you would like an increase in this limit?



Can't you currently get around this anyway by putting the stacks into a container and contracting the container?
Winter Archipelago
Autumn Industrial Enterprises
#17 - 2016-07-29 17:29:37 UTC
Will revoking access to a Citadel after the contract has been accepted trigger the change to the Asset Safety location? If not, it's going to be pretty easy to set up contracts to a Citadel you control, then revoke access once the contract has been accepted. Hauler Beware at a minimal risk to the scammer in this case, especially when a single scam will pay for the cost of an Astrahus.
Lillian Dekar
Omni Galactic
Central Omni Galactic Group
#18 - 2016-07-29 17:31:21 UTC
Winter Archipelago wrote:
Will revoking access to a Citadel after the contract has been accepted trigger the change to the Asset Safety location? If not, it's going to be pretty easy to set up contracts to a Citadel you control, then revoke access once the contract has been accepted. Hauler Beware at a minimal risk to the scammer in this case, especially when a single scam will pay for the cost of an Astrahus.



the "Ability to finish a contract from outside a citadel without docking access: Will very likely be added in a follow-up patch" would help with this...
CCP Habakuk
C C P
C C P Alliance
#19 - 2016-07-29 17:31:28 UTC
Lillian Dekar wrote:
Can't you currently get around this anyway by putting the stacks into a container and contracting the container?

Exactly in this case the 2000 item limit applies (and not the 200 item limit, which was now increased to 500 items)

CCP Habakuk | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five 0 | (Team Gridlock)

Bug reporting | Mass Testing

CCP Habakuk
C C P
C C P Alliance
#20 - 2016-07-29 17:34:14 UTC
Lillian Dekar wrote:
Winter Archipelago wrote:
Will revoking access to a Citadel after the contract has been accepted trigger the change to the Asset Safety location? If not, it's going to be pretty easy to set up contracts to a Citadel you control, then revoke access once the contract has been accepted. Hauler Beware at a minimal risk to the scammer in this case, especially when a single scam will pay for the cost of an Astrahus.



the "Ability to finish a contract from outside a citadel without docking access: Will very likely be added in a follow-up patch" would help with this...

Exactly this. For now it is your own risk to accept a courier contract to a citadel, if you are not sure that your access will not be removed.

CCP Habakuk | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five 0 | (Team Gridlock)

Bug reporting | Mass Testing

123Next page