These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#401 - 2017-05-30 15:22:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Quote:
As stated by CCP the intention was to shift market activity from npc stations to player owned structures.


In which case this will get in the way of that objective, or is that an intention? Hard to know with CCP if it is deliberate or incompetence.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#402 - 2017-05-30 15:23:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Double post in Russian of all things, weird...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Gimme Sake
State War Academy
Caldari State
#403 - 2017-05-30 15:31:37 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Gimme Sake wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Well just read the whole thread, with the exception of the trolls that I have blocked, but got the normal flavour from those quoting them. I find it highly amusing that I have had such an impact on Jenn aSnide who dislikes my balance suggestions so much, I can imagine him holding his breath until he goes blue in the face with upset. I should point out to this troll that I have not been involved in any Anti-ganking activity for 3 months and 21 days, instead I have been blowing up ships belonging to one of the better null sec PvP alliances in fleet and small gang combat. I guess that makes me an AG player lol...

baltec1 stated that it was content, what he means by that is that some poor sap with no counter is going to pay for other peoples content, same as bumping freighters and same with this scam. Great content as always isn't it...


Personally I think that people should just not haul to player owned stations of any sort unless they have a very close relationship, for a while I was doing some hauling on my alt for people with no collateral, just my word as my bond and that was the only way I would move stuff to player owned stations. Sorry Citadel owners...

I think the real issue goes back to the ability to fix a massive collateral on a heap of junk, if the contract showed the value of the items carried against the collateral then the system would be self regulating, though of course that could be abused with some effort. Then people could assess risk there and then and not lose their shirt and end up with a full load of Trit for 8bn and those scammers with a brain will be adding in those useless high value items because they can, but at least that is effort...

Gimme Sake and Salvos had a very interesting exchange and I did like the focus on the RMT part, something that I had actually began to suspect myself due to the misuse of the collateral system on courier contracts. Anyway, had fun reading this thread, and that post by baltec1 on content, lol still makes me chuckle that...


You too are being subjective.

Anti ganking, scamming, RMT... is NOT the topic of this thread.

The topic of this thread is a certain mechanic (or lack off) introduced with the citadel patch that renders the intended (or some of the intended) purpose of player owned structures non functional. If you have any subjective observation regarding the mentioned please strip it off examples of valid game play elements you may dislike and consider unethical or unfair. We're not discussing EvE's nature but mechanics. It's reather simple, do they function as intended or not?


I will bite, not subjective, merely observational on the response that you had from some people, for example Jenn was aiming that point about an AG position at me and Herzog, not sure why it was important to Jenn, but he is rather crazy. I merely commented on the potential RMT angle of this scam as being something that I had wondered about.

I have always focused on game balance, I prefer not to get into unethical in a game where you can chose to be good , bad or both as the mood takes you, even unfair is a bit naff as a concept, but game balance is very important.

I suggested that the real issue here is the lack of information on the real value of the goods within the courier contract, if there was a calculated value placed on the items to enable the hauler to compare against the collateral then there would be no real issue. I am very aware that smart players will manipulate it using margin trading on certain blue items, but that requires effort and for me that game balance is about right.. With that change the issue would become less stark because it would not be the vast sums scammed that we have now and therefore less value in doing it, but still allowing smart people to scam and maintain the current mechanics around citadel docking.

As people have quite rightly suggested there is currently no counter, I suggested a way to check the value of the contract so the hauler only has the difference between the real value of the cargo and the collateral and he can chose to take that risk. Easy fix in my opinion.



Again you're talking about scamming.

This freezing assets at will mechanic is also present in the case where you use the market to buy something from a Citadel.

Not restricted to "contract scamming".

"Never not blob!" ~ Plato

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#404 - 2017-05-30 15:44:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Gimme Sake wrote:
Again you're talking about scamming.

This freezing assets at will mechanic is also present in the case where you use the market to buy something from a Citadel.

Not restricted to "contract scamming".



The OP posted this:

Quote:
The ability for someone to lock you out of a plex/citadel after accepting a courier contract, in my opinion is absolutely abuse of a game mechanic.


I addressed the courier contract scamming issue based on the courier contract interface giving you an estimate of the value of the goods being moved, and that would solve the issue. in terms of scam courier contracts based around locking people out of the destination.

I currently have no opinion on the plex side of this issue as I believe that the safety system is a good way of dealing with this issue.

In terms of people stopping markets and clone bays, that is something that people have to accept as a risk and the safety works for the market part too.

in terms of build loss when people stop the module I would prefer that CCP just stopped the build and gave back the reprocessed value of the part of the build completed and the full amount of the uncompleted materials based on the time of the job into safety, losing the whole lot seriously sucks.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Gimme Sake
State War Academy
Caldari State
#405 - 2017-05-30 15:49:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Gimme Sake
Dracvlad wrote:


The OP posted this:

Quote:
The ability for someone to lock you out of a plex/citadel after accepting a courier contract OR BUYING ITEMS FROM THEIR MARKET, in my opinion is absolutely abuse of a game mechanic.


.



There, I reformulated it for you to make you notice it isn't a courier scam but a mechanic flaw.

"Never not blob!" ~ Plato

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#406 - 2017-05-30 15:58:14 UTC
Gimme Sake wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:


The OP posted this:

Quote:
The ability for someone to lock you out of a plex/citadel after accepting a courier contract OR BUYING ITEMS FROM THEIR MARKET, in my opinion is absolutely abuse of a game mechanic.


.



There, I reformulated it for you to make you notice it isn't a courier scam but a mechanic flaw.


Well if you say so..., but the added part in capitals is not what the OP wrote.

Quote:
The ability for someone to lock you out of a plex/citadel after accepting a courier contract, in my opinion is absolutely abuse of a game mechanic.

To me this is straight up mechanical abuse and the fact that CCP lets this type of activity go on, is absolutely disparaging to new players and disgusting to old players. This is NOT how to run a game, just because scamming is allowed doesnt mean you allow/design game mechanics to specifically allow scamming.

I have a solution and it's very very simple, allow couriers to right click their package with in 2500m of the citadel/plex and select deliver.

Why would CCP continue to allow this type of abuse, aren't you wanting new players to come into your game and stay? This isn't part of the whole "eve is hardcore, rah rah rah, get used to it rah rah rah, salt salt salt" Take this lesson to heart because you nearly killed your game by not listening to the silent majority but listening to the vocal minority when it comes to crap like this.


FIX DELIVERING TO PLEX/CITADELS IMMEDIATELY!

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Gimme Sake
State War Academy
Caldari State
#407 - 2017-05-30 16:01:22 UTC
Yes is not what the OP wrote but it is what is happening in game.

"Never not blob!" ~ Plato

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#408 - 2017-05-30 17:40:31 UTC
Gimme Sake wrote:

I don't know why you keep considering it a scam. If this valid form of gameplay (aka scamming) was intended for the mechanic we are discussing here then it wouldn't be listed with a red exclamation point in the contract list. That's like being scammed by a guy wearing a bright red t-shirt with "I SCAM" imprinted on it.

Again you divert the topic to make it look like an anti scamming thread.


Because it is a scam. It works similarly to the margin trading scam. It has been around since the beginning, but with player owned stations and outposts in NS. The fact that CCP has a warning in there does not render a non-scam.

Gimme Sake wrote:
p.s. I think the title of the thread is being pretty succint. "Breaking news: Citadel/Plex contracting." With the newly introduced plex mechanics and the old citadel exploit there are areas in the game where this exploit can allow the price to be manipulated simply by listing something on the market while keeping it off the market through mentioned mechanics. That is no longer a scam, that is market manipulation, another valid form of gameplay affected by this mechanic.


It is not an exploit. It is a well known mechanic that has been around for over a decade.

Gimme Sake wrote:
Let's say you're a citadel owner and have machs up for sale. I buy them from you but you see the name of the buyer in the transaction list and cut my access to your citadel immediately after the transaction. I have now frozen assets in your structure just because I used the market to buy from a citadel. Nothing related to "contract scamming", just a market transaction.

Were I a fool to buy from a citadel? Would I buy from a citadel again? How does that affect the other citadels owners that just want to trade and not troll? There's no contract history here to warn me because I bought it from the market. All I can do for the future is to avoid buying from player owned structures. Should I waste all of my game time making lists with who owns what and which alt is owning what stucture that can be moved and anchored some place else? Do you realise this is absurd?


Again, that is perfectly valid game play and you were imprudent and foolish to buy something before you docked. Dock, then buy it. That way you can undock with it at the very least and go to an NPC station or another citadel where the owner wants a reputation for being honest and trustworthy.

Come here to the forums, go to Market Discussions and start a thread where you keep a list of such dishonest citadel owners and encourage others to post there too.

"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
#409 - 2017-05-30 17:43:07 UTC
Gimme Sake wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Gimme Sake wrote:
Do you realise this is absurd?


I think anyone objective must recognize that this makes player owned structures very risky to anyone attempting to access them or work in them, that are not its owners.

In the space of a few clicks, they can block you accessing your purchased assets, existing assets there, contracted assets to be moved as well as delivery of assets contracted to that destination.



Risk taken is something calculated. You take risks knowing that you have a chance of positive outcome. Playing roulette implies you have a chance to win. If one side can assure themselves 100% chance of victory through game mechanics regardless of conjuncture and situation it is no longer a risk element but an exploit.


Ex ante you face risk. You do not know if the citadel owner is running a scam or not. Ex post, you do not face any risk because the bad state has occurred if the citadel owner is scammer.

"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

Gimme Sake
State War Academy
Caldari State
#410 - 2017-05-30 17:55:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Gimme Sake
Teckos Pech wrote:
Gimme Sake wrote:

I don't know why you keep considering it a scam. If this valid form of gameplay (aka scamming) was intended for the mechanic we are discussing here then it wouldn't be listed with a red exclamation point in the contract list. That's like being scammed by a guy wearing a bright red t-shirt with "I SCAM" imprinted on it.

Again you divert the topic to make it look like an anti scamming thread.


Because it is a scam. It works similarly to the margin trading scam. It has been around since the beginning, but with player owned stations and outposts in NS. The fact that CCP has a warning in there does not render a non-scam.

Gimme Sake wrote:
p.s. I think the title of the thread is being pretty succint. "Breaking news: Citadel/Plex contracting." With the newly introduced plex mechanics and the old citadel exploit there are areas in the game where this exploit can allow the price to be manipulated simply by listing something on the market while keeping it off the market through mentioned mechanics. That is no longer a scam, that is market manipulation, another valid form of gameplay affected by this mechanic.


It is not an exploit. It is a well known mechanic that has been around for over a decade.

Gimme Sake wrote:
Let's say you're a citadel owner and have machs up for sale. I buy them from you but you see the name of the buyer in the transaction list and cut my access to your citadel immediately after the transaction. I have now frozen assets in your structure just because I used the market to buy from a citadel. Nothing related to "contract scamming", just a market transaction.

Were I a fool to buy from a citadel? Would I buy from a citadel again? How does that affect the other citadels owners that just want to trade and not troll? There's no contract history here to warn me because I bought it from the market. All I can do for the future is to avoid buying from player owned structures. Should I waste all of my game time making lists with who owns what and which alt is owning what stucture that can be moved and anchored some place else? Do you realise this is absurd?


Again, that is perfectly valid game play and you were imprudent and foolish to buy something before you docked. Dock, then buy it. That way you can undock with it at the very least and go to an NPC station or another citadel where the owner wants a reputation for being honest and trustworthy.

Come here to the forums, go to Market Discussions and start a thread where you keep a list of such dishonest citadel owners and encourage others to post there too.



I have not been neither foolish or imprudent I gave you an example of something that does not constitute a "contract scam".


Perhaps you consider making lists with dishonest players EvE gameplay but I do not. "Trust no one" is enough for me. Besides, you can only see contract emiters and not the name of the players setting up market orders.

I conclusion the only way to play smart is to avoid buying from citadels. Which renders their market module obsolete from the start.

p.s.

About ordering from distance... I believe there's a skill (or skills) to be trained which allow setting up market orders from various distances. According to your game play philosophy the current mechanic should invalidate those skills because?

"Never not blob!" ~ Plato

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#411 - 2017-05-30 18:20:26 UTC
Gimme Sake wrote:
Cypherous wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
A) Improving the Contract spreadsheet UI with sortable pickup/delivery structure type columns has two effects:
--1) Clued players can easier sort the interface to avoid certain structures, which is available info anyways.
--2) Scammers have more credibility, as they can argue "why didnt you use the UI to check the pickup/destination type, st00pid nob".


The UI already has both a red < ! > on the contract search window and red text on the contract window stating that you might not be able to dock at the destination, people already have to ignore BOTH of these things in order to accept the contract, idiots will be idiots, i saw a guy in jita local yesterday keep buying fake navy vexors on contracts linked in



You can buy from the market as well. The citadel owner can lock you out and freeze your assets. The only sollution to avoid it is not to buy from Citadels.




The solution is to not buy until you are docked at the citadel and that you have enough capacity on your ship to haul all the stuff you buy when you undock.

Jesus....

"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

Gimme Sake
State War Academy
Caldari State
#412 - 2017-05-30 18:24:00 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Gimme Sake wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Gimme Sake wrote:
Do you realise this is absurd?


I think anyone objective must recognize that this makes player owned structures very risky to anyone attempting to access them or work in them, that are not its owners.

In the space of a few clicks, they can block you accessing your purchased assets, existing assets there, contracted assets to be moved as well as delivery of assets contracted to that destination.



Risk taken is something calculated. You take risks knowing that you have a chance of positive outcome. Playing roulette implies you have a chance to win. If one side can assure themselves 100% chance of victory through game mechanics regardless of conjuncture and situation it is no longer a risk element but an exploit.


Ex ante you face risk. You do not know if the citadel owner is running a scam or not. Ex post, you do not face any risk because the bad state has occurred if the citadel owner is scammer.



Do you realize that as long as NPC stations offer better conditions than player owned structures the market will never be able to make the desired transition?

"Never not blob!" ~ Plato

Gimme Sake
State War Academy
Caldari State
#413 - 2017-05-30 18:27:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Gimme Sake
Teckos Pech wrote:
Gimme Sake wrote:
Cypherous wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
A) Improving the Contract spreadsheet UI with sortable pickup/delivery structure type columns has two effects:
--1) Clued players can easier sort the interface to avoid certain structures, which is available info anyways.
--2) Scammers have more credibility, as they can argue "why didnt you use the UI to check the pickup/destination type, st00pid nob".


The UI already has both a red < ! > on the contract search window and red text on the contract window stating that you might not be able to dock at the destination, people already have to ignore BOTH of these things in order to accept the contract, idiots will be idiots, i saw a guy in jita local yesterday keep buying fake navy vexors on contracts linked in



You can buy from the market as well. The citadel owner can lock you out and freeze your assets. The only sollution to avoid it is not to buy from Citadels.




The solution is to not buy until you are docked at the citadel and that you have enough capacity on your ship to haul all the stuff you buy when you undock.

Jesus....



I conclusion I should be docked in the mentioned citadel and have frighters trained if I want to carry out my assets to safety? Because hiring haulers is not an option.

You can't be serious buddy. Cool

"Never not blob!" ~ Plato

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#414 - 2017-05-30 18:29:51 UTC
Gimme Sake wrote:



I have not been neither foolish or imprudent I gave you an example of something that does not constitute a "contract scam".


I was using the indefinite "you". Lighten up.


Quote:
Perhaps you consider making lists with dishonest players EvE gameplay but I do not. "Trust no one" is enough for me. Besides, you can only see contract emiters and not the name of the players setting up market orders.


You won't get far with that attitude, IMO. That is an EVE Motto, but it is overly simplistic. Eventually, people do start trusting others, but usually after repeated interactions and trust is earned/built. When I was in Executive Outcomes I worked on the corps reaction fund. At first I was given access to a limited amount of resources. As time went by, years later the hangers I had been granted access to had well over 100 billion ISK in value, and I had access and knowledge of where all the reaction towers were. I could have swiped all that stuff, but I didn't. As such with the CEO of that corporation I probably have a strong reputation of trust.

Yes, I could use that trust to rob the corporation. However, my reputation would be tarnished from that point forward. Nobody should trust me from that point forward. That is a cost.

Gimme Sake wrote:
p.s.

About ordering from distance... I believe there's a skill (or skills) to be trained which allow setting up market orders from various distances. According to your game play philosophy the current mechanic should invalidate those skills because?


Well your strategy invalidates them too. Roll

"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
#415 - 2017-05-30 18:40:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Gimme Sake wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:


The solution is to not buy until you are docked at the citadel and that you have enough capacity on your ship to haul all the stuff you buy when you undock.

Jesus....



I conclusion I should be docked in the mention citadel and have frighters trained if I want to carry out my assets to safety? Because hiring haulers is not an option.

You can't be serious buddy. Cool


First off you don't need a freighter. If you are buying a ship...then buy the ship, you don't need any cargo capacity.

If you are buying a ship and fittings...same thing.

If you are buying a ship, and fittings, and ammo, then yeah you'll need the cargo capacity for ammo, but most ships can hold ALOT of ammo.

And haulers range in size and what kind of cargo you are going to be hauling, so yeah a freighter will almost surely work, but it may not be the only option.

And this is a strategy you use an unknown citadel owner.

The bottom line is that trust is important to economic activity. And building up a reputation for honest and trust should be costly. That way, if you decide to renege on that trust/honest it will actually cost you something. All that effort and time you put into building that reputation.

Now players can take your strategy: never ever buy from a citadel no matter what. But that is very limiting. So you may find yourself missing out on opportunities others take advantage of based on your very conservative approach.

"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

Gimme Sake
State War Academy
Caldari State
#416 - 2017-05-30 19:00:55 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:



Quote:
Perhaps you consider making lists with dishonest players EvE gameplay but I do not. "Trust no one" is enough for me. Besides, you can only see contract emiters and not the name of the players setting up market orders.


You won't get far with that attitude, IMO. That is an EVE Motto, but it is overly simplistic. Eventually, people do start trusting others, but usually after repeated interactions and trust is earned/built. When I was in Executive Outcomes I worked on the corps reaction fund. At first I was given access to a limited amount of resources. As time went by, years later the hangers I had been granted access to had well over 100 billion ISK in value, and I had access and knowledge of where all the reaction towers were. I could have swiped all that stuff, but I didn't. As such with the CEO of that corporation I probably have a strong reputation of trust.

Yes, I could use that trust to rob the corporation. However, my reputation would be tarnished from that point forward. Nobody should trust me from that point forward. That is a cost.

Gimme Sake wrote:
p.s.

About ordering from distance... I believe there's a skill (or skills) to be trained which allow setting up market orders from various distances. According to your game play philosophy the current mechanic should invalidate those skills because?


Well your strategy invalidates them too. Roll



No one questions your credentials but that is only valid inside your alliance. Afaik dealing with the goons is just a long string of stories about questionable intentions. The reputation of the alliance precedes that of the player as you well... grrr... know.

My strategy for now is to buy from exclusively from npc stations because they guarantee the security of the transaction. Haven't seen yet any incentive to risk trusting a citadel owner only aruments against doing so. Other than that there are players in the game I consider trusty enough for certain activities; but that has nothing to do with citadel functioning mechanics.

You propose a matrimony approach to trade in which you should get to know the player first then trade. I need ammo now and I dont have time for a tango.

After all we are talking about a module that can be or can be not installed on a citadel. No one is forced to do so if they dont have the means to guarantee transaction security.

"Never not blob!" ~ Plato

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#417 - 2017-05-30 19:24:16 UTC
Gimme Sake wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:



Quote:
Perhaps you consider making lists with dishonest players EvE gameplay but I do not. "Trust no one" is enough for me. Besides, you can only see contract emiters and not the name of the players setting up market orders.


You won't get far with that attitude, IMO. That is an EVE Motto, but it is overly simplistic. Eventually, people do start trusting others, but usually after repeated interactions and trust is earned/built. When I was in Executive Outcomes I worked on the corps reaction fund. At first I was given access to a limited amount of resources. As time went by, years later the hangers I had been granted access to had well over 100 billion ISK in value, and I had access and knowledge of where all the reaction towers were. I could have swiped all that stuff, but I didn't. As such with the CEO of that corporation I probably have a strong reputation of trust.

Yes, I could use that trust to rob the corporation. However, my reputation would be tarnished from that point forward. Nobody should trust me from that point forward. That is a cost.

Gimme Sake wrote:
p.s.

About ordering from distance... I believe there's a skill (or skills) to be trained which allow setting up market orders from various distances. According to your game play philosophy the current mechanic should invalidate those skills because?


Well your strategy invalidates them too. Roll



No one questions your credentials but that is only valid inside your alliance. Afaik dealing with the goons is just a long string of stories about questionable intentions. The reputation of the alliance precedes that of the player as you well... grrr... know.

My strategy for now is to buy from exclusively from npc stations because they guarantee the security of the transaction. Haven't seen yet any incentive to risk trusting a citadel owner only aruments against doing so. Other than that there are players in the game I consider trusty enough for certain activities; but that has nothing to do with citadel functioning mechanics.

You propose a matrimony approach to trade in which you should get to know the player first then trade. I need ammo now and I dont have time for a tango.

After all we are talking about a module that can be or can be not installed on a citadel. No one is forced to do so if they dont have the means to guarantee transaction security.


Then dock up and buy the ammo, toss it in the cargo hold and undock and go shoot stuff.

Seriously if you want to use your overly restrictive strategy, be my guest, but it is coming off as just a tad bit ridiculous. Hell, I almost always buy PLEX in citadels, it is usually cheaper. If for some bizarre reason I have to move it, I dock up, buy it, then pop it in the PLEX vault. I'd buy other stuff too, but only once I docked. So go ahead and "cut off your nose to spite your face" if you really want too.

"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

Gimme Sake
State War Academy
Caldari State
#418 - 2017-05-30 19:33:34 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Gimme Sake wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:



Quote:
Perhaps you consider making lists with dishonest players EvE gameplay but I do not. "Trust no one" is enough for me. Besides, you can only see contract emiters and not the name of the players setting up market orders.


You won't get far with that attitude, IMO. That is an EVE Motto, but it is overly simplistic. Eventually, people do start trusting others, but usually after repeated interactions and trust is earned/built. When I was in Executive Outcomes I worked on the corps reaction fund. At first I was given access to a limited amount of resources. As time went by, years later the hangers I had been granted access to had well over 100 billion ISK in value, and I had access and knowledge of where all the reaction towers were. I could have swiped all that stuff, but I didn't. As such with the CEO of that corporation I probably have a strong reputation of trust.

Yes, I could use that trust to rob the corporation. However, my reputation would be tarnished from that point forward. Nobody should trust me from that point forward. That is a cost.

Gimme Sake wrote:
p.s.

About ordering from distance... I believe there's a skill (or skills) to be trained which allow setting up market orders from various distances. According to your game play philosophy the current mechanic should invalidate those skills because?


Well your strategy invalidates them too. Roll



No one questions your credentials but that is only valid inside your alliance. Afaik dealing with the goons is just a long string of stories about questionable intentions. The reputation of the alliance precedes that of the player as you well... grrr... know.

My strategy for now is to buy from exclusively from npc stations because they guarantee the security of the transaction. Haven't seen yet any incentive to risk trusting a citadel owner only aruments against doing so. Other than that there are players in the game I consider trusty enough for certain activities; but that has nothing to do with citadel functioning mechanics.

You propose a matrimony approach to trade in which you should get to know the player first then trade. I need ammo now and I dont have time for a tango.

After all we are talking about a module that can be or can be not installed on a citadel. No one is forced to do so if they dont have the means to guarantee transaction security.


Then dock up and buy the ammo, toss it in the cargo hold and undock and go shoot stuff.

Seriously if you want to use your overly restrictive strategy, be my guest, but it is coming off as just a tad bit ridiculous. Hell, I almost always buy PLEX in citadels, it is usually cheaper. If for some bizarre reason I have to move it, I dock up, buy it, then pop it in the PLEX vault. I'd buy other stuff too, but only once I docked. So go ahead and "cut off your nose to spite your face" if you really want too.


That is only available if you buy stuff that can be consumed on spot or require no transport. I did such transactions too. But if I need to buy something that requires hauling, you said it yourself, I should have a freighter docked or I risk getting my assets frozen. Hirring a hauling corp is out of question due to mentioned mechanics.

I can live without all the stress and buy from an NPC station and that attitude only hurts you as a citadel owner. If you can afford the loss fine but you might lose serious profit opportunities because of it.

"Never not blob!" ~ Plato

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#419 - 2017-05-30 19:48:37 UTC
Gimme Sake wrote:


That is only available if you buy stuff that can be consumed on spot or require no transport. I did such transactions too. But if I need to buy something that requires hauling, you said it yourself, I should have a freighter docked or I risk getting my assets frozen. Hirring a hauling corp is out of question due to mentioned mechanics.

I can live without all the stress and buy from an NPC station and that attitude only hurts you as a citadel owner. If you can afford the loss fine but you might lose serious profit opportunities because of it.


What? You can't undock with the ship you just bought? You can't toss the fittings for a ship into an iteron V or whatever hauler you use and undock? Is the citadel owner going to some how steal it from your cargo bay?

I'm just not seeing the stress. You open the market window. Ahhh, there is the ammo in a citadel. I'll dock up....there we go. Buy it, pop it in my cargo bay, and undock. Market transaction successfully completed.

"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

Nicolai Serkanner
Incredible.
Brave Collective
#420 - 2017-05-30 19:57:07 UTC
Gimme Sake wrote:



Do you realize that as long as NPC stations offer better conditions than player owned structures the market will never be able to make the desired transition?



Risk - reward, dude.