These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Coralas
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#581 - 2017-06-01 00:20:05 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Red/Black Frog is wary of Upwell structures you say?

Hmm..
Wonder why?


Redfrog might even have a dedicated player checking general access to citadels, they will check the issuers history, you can't do an individual lock out because they recontract to their haulers, (ie locking out your contracting party is pointless), and if they start losing money on it, they'll just stop taking contracts to citadels from people with no history of issuing completed hauling contracts, or they'll contact you and offer you no-collateral hauling only, which they can because they are redfrog and people trust them.

But good luck with your endeavour.

Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#582 - 2017-06-01 03:43:45 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Lets all start scamming Red Frog.

Issue private contract full of trash-> set 3 days-> one day for delivery-> lock access to structure.

1bil per hit.

Unanchor structure, shift to alt, anchor, rinse repeat.

Everything is fine.
Good luck with that, as far as I know Red Frog will only deliver, either directly or via a subsidiary such as Blag Frog, to citadels owned by people on an approved list.

They're professionals, they know how to minimise their risk.


And apparently asking that of others is too much apparently.

"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
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#583 - 2017-06-01 03:50:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Coralas wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Red/Black Frog is wary of Upwell structures you say?

Hmm..
Wonder why?


Redfrog might even have a dedicated player checking general access to citadels, they will check the issuers history, you can't do an individual lock out because they recontract to their haulers, (ie locking out your contracting party is pointless), and if they start losing money on it, they'll just stop taking contracts to citadels from people with no history of issuing completed hauling contracts, or they'll contact you and offer you no-collateral hauling only, which they can because they are redfrog and people trust them.

But good luck with your endeavour.



There is that word again..."trust"...funny how it keeps coming up again and again. In this thread and others.

Citadel owners that want to have courier contracts have to build a reputation of trust. Yes that is costly and for good reason. If were not, then it could not be built--i.e. courier contracts to citadels could not emerge from the in game economy. Imposing them from the top down deprives the players of trying to bring that kind of thing about. Did CCP plan this? Who cares. With emergent systems that is the whole point, you get things popping up one did not expect.

"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

Coralas
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#584 - 2017-06-01 06:41:52 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Coralas wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Red/Black Frog is wary of Upwell structures you say?

Hmm..
Wonder why?


Redfrog might even have a dedicated player checking general access to citadels, they will check the issuers history, you can't do an individual lock out because they recontract to their haulers, (ie locking out your contracting party is pointless), and if they start losing money on it, they'll just stop taking contracts to citadels from people with no history of issuing completed hauling contracts, or they'll contact you and offer you no-collateral hauling only, which they can because they are redfrog and people trust them.

But good luck with your endeavour.



There is that word again..."trust"...funny how it keeps coming up again and again. In this thread and others.

Citadel owners that want to have courier contracts have to build a reputation of trust. Yes that is costly and for good reason. If were not, then it could not be built--i.e. courier contracts to citadels could not emerge from the in game economy. Imposing them from the top down deprives the players of trying to bring that kind of thing about. Did CCP plan this? Who cares. With emergent systems that is the whole point, you get things popping up one did not expect.


Aye - current status probably increased redfrog profits, since there is now another variation of scam taking out competitors and another reason for haulers to subcontract for redfrog, and another reason for customers to pay premiums.

Always amuses me when Salvos puts up the exact wrong example.
Coralas
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#585 - 2017-06-01 06:51:05 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Mr Epeen wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:


Never mind using the following rule: if it looks too good to be true it probably is.

Aye. There's the rub.

It doesn't have to look too good to be true. It just has to look like any one of the other thousand public contracts up at any given time.

There's only one solution. Don't deal with citadels. Period.

Mr Epeen Cool


Or do basic background checks which will flag up a scammer.
Whatever spins your wheels, Baltec.

But much like I don't run background checks on emails from Nigerian princes to know it's simpler just to ignore them, I can't be arsed to run background checks on a citadel contract when there are hundreds in the same constellation just like it that pay just as well and are easy to see at a glance if they are scams or not. But if you are so determined to take that citadel run, then knock yourself out. It's your sandbox as much as it's mine to do as you wish.

Mr Epeen Cool


Nah, there are citadel contract issuers out there with 10 contracts on the market, none of which have wipeout scale collaterals, you amortize the 30 seconds of reading their contracting history over the 10 contracts, and you accept/fly them one at a time mixed with other contracts going the same way.

Those issuers do things the way they do to make them attractive hauls, which gets them done quick, which saves them opportunity cost tied up in waiting contracts.

If you don't want to do them, that is fine, all that does is help the people who do the research make more money.
Salvos Rhoska
#586 - 2017-06-01 07:12:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Coralas wrote:
Aye - current status probably increased redfrog profits, since there is now another variation of scam taking out competitors and another reason for haulers to subcontract for redfrog, and another reason for customers to pay premiums.

Always amuses me when Salvos puts up the exact wrong example.


I wasnt wrong.

According to Jonah, Frog wont ship to Upwell structures unless they are on a trusted list, exactly because of how their owners can restrict access in a matter of seconds.

That leaves Upwell contracts for someone else to take the risk on.

Shame about Asset Safety or it might be worthwhile to explode them.
Even then the scam structure is likely entirely empty anyways.

TLDR: Upwell contracts are risky. Avoid them.

1) Still think improving the Contract spreadsheet UI with two sortable pickup/destination structure types columns is reasonable, especially now that Upwell structures mushroom everywhere.

2) Still think there should be a delay on access/standing changes on Upwell structures, but since it gets conflated here as being solely targetted at the scam, probably better to debate it in a dedicated thread, as it is about much wider issues amongst which the scam is trivial. (Such as forcing a 5day delay to access to property of another player simply with a few clicks)
Coralas
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#587 - 2017-06-01 10:08:19 UTC
Wrong example Salvos, not wrong factually.

The trusted list is a valuable thing in itself, and probably worth effort for legitimate citadel owners to get onto, and contracts to those citadels might comprise a large proportion of the non scam citadel destination contracts.

That is exactly the gameplay that CCP wants from citadels. its trust gameplay.
April rabbit
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#588 - 2017-06-01 11:37:46 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
April rabbit wrote:

Small corp is not going to have any success if this citadel is covered by Merc contracts or belongs to alts or friends of some big entity.
Example: Main Perimeter citadels. Noone attacks it because they are protected.

All in all: the whole mechanics looks like very skewed towards bigger fishes. It was always this way in 0.0 space and now high-sec has fun learning it too. However i don't see reasons to keep it intact. At least in high-sec where there should not be real need to form bigger fishes to survive.


We got it. It is too much risk for you.

Not for me, LoL Lol
I'm nullseccer and have nothing in common with high-sec citadels outside of using it for selling my stuff.

Teckos Pech wrote:

Use NPC stations. Citadels were intended to carry some level of risk with them. Even asset safety implies some level of ex ante risk.

This is what was proposed right from the start - ignoring citadels as much as possible. But some strange people argued against it.

Thanks for supporting!

Personally i believe that game mechanics deserved your "do not use it" is not good addition. But to each their own.
Hevymetal
POT Corp
#589 - 2017-06-01 12:08:47 UTC
This thread makes me chuckle. If some of the people posting in this thread put half the effort they have posting here into researching a contract BEFORE accpeting it we wouldn't be having a problem.

Eve is filled with scams, it's up to you to not fall for them.

As i said earlier Be thankful it's not low or null in which case insult would be added to injury by destroying your ship with it's insured cargo, then your pod, then a good laugh by the contract holder getting immediate payout (not having to wait the full duration of the contract) plus whatever loot he gets off your wreck.

NO place is safe in Eve from being scammed, killed or somehow getting yourself shafteed.
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners
Already Replaced.
#590 - 2017-06-01 12:44:44 UTC
Hevymetal wrote:
This thread makes me chuckle. If some of the people posting in this thread put half the effort they have posting here into researching a contract BEFORE accepting it we wouldn't be having a problem.


You just described every single complaint post/thread in the history of this board (and probably the internet).

Quote:

Eve is filled with scams, it's up to you to not fall for them.

As i said earlier Be thankful it's not low or null in which case insult would be added to injury by destroying your ship with it's insured cargo, then your pod, then a good laugh by the contract holder getting immediate payout (not having to wait the full duration of the contract) plus whatever loot he gets off your wreck.

NO place is safe in Eve from being scammed, killed or somehow getting yourself shafteed.


It hasn't helped that CCP has seemed to respond to players whining, crying and helplessness several times over the last 5 years. When a complainer sees someone else's complaints generate some kind of action, this just throws them into overdrive with the complaining. They know that mommy CCP will eventually fix it for them, so there is literally no need to develop the cognitive skills one would need to figure it out for themselves.

This isn't just bad for the complainers (who will continue to have problems in game because those 'figure it out' skills are helpful in every area of the game), but it's bad in general, because instead of making a game about thinking, CCP ends up making a game that turns thinking players (players that actually resent the idea of hand-holding) off.
Toobo
Project Fruit House
#591 - 2017-06-01 14:15:18 UTC
I have two things to say

1) Sorry OP, but I think Citadel owner should have the right/power to deny anyone's access to their structure at any time they please, and this should include denying delivery to their structure for whatever the reason they see fit

i dunno man, like someone's docked in their citadel and the owner don't want him to get resupplies? or the citadel owner with the market want to lock out a particular trader? maybe they want to cut supplies to a particular producer to drive them out?

Many possible scenarios, but the ownership and the ability to control access your structure is a very serious and important issue. You could put yourself in the structure owner's shoes and claim any ways to circumvent your denial to access is an abuse too. ;)

2) Players make rules/norms/whatever.

BS. Total BS.

Someone pointed it out correctly before, but only got half right. CCP makes EULA and TOS, and players make whatever else you call it like rules/norms/etc. But guess what, CCP can change their EULA/TOS at any given time as they please and ban anyone from the game as they see fit and make any activity a bannable offence if they choose to do so. So erm yeah, whatever you build in sandbox is just that, made out of sand and will collapse when the sandbox owner decides to shake it a bit.

Whatever 'player content' you create can be later ruled out by CCP, and if they feel it is fitting for them to do so, they can wipe your assets and wallets, even those accumulated during the time where the game mechanics made it possible to do so.

CCP owns everything in game and they owe you nothing (maybe except the access to server, which is what you pay for really)

You can do many things in EVE, and it's one of the best sandbox games I've ever experienced in any platform. But if you (the playeer) are a king, CCP is like God. You can rule in any way you want, but God can change everything for you on a whim and don't owe you an apology.


* I'm not saying this to say CCP is bad/whatever, pretty much all games are ran like this and CCP is not the only bad one here. But I think EVE players have that extra layer of illusion that this game is any different.

Cheers Love! The cavalry's here!

Marek Kanenald
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#592 - 2017-06-01 15:15:33 UTC
Hevymetal wrote:
This thread makes me chuckle. If some of the people posting in this thread put half the effort they have posting here into researching a contract BEFORE accpeting it we wouldn't be having a problem.

Eve is filled with scams, it's up to you to not fall for them.

As i said earlier Be thankful it's not low or null in which case insult would be added to injury by destroying your ship with it's insured cargo, then your pod, then a good laugh by the contract holder getting immediate payout (not having to wait the full duration of the contract) plus whatever loot he gets off your wreck.

NO place is safe in Eve from being scammed, killed or somehow getting yourself shafteed.


I find it funny that people like you think posters in this thread are players that got scammed.

The problem isn't that scamming with it is possible, the problem is that it basically makes the courier contract system defunct.

It also works contrary to CCP's stated goals of moving the majority of trade to citadels.
SurrenderMonkey
The Exchange Collective
Solyaris Chtonium
#593 - 2017-06-01 16:10:37 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
Marek Kanenald wrote:


I find it funny that people like you think posters in this thread are players that got scammed.

The problem isn't that scamming with it is possible, the problem is that it basically makes the courier contract system defunct.




While I don't entirely disagree that the citadel-courier situation is a little silly, the hyperbolic whinging about the supposed importance of the problem is moronic.

It doesn't make the system defunct. This is plainly obvious, as the system is used, daily and to great effect, by many people. It's an unequivocally nonsensical statement, with no purpose beyond wasting everyone's time.

IIRC, there was a proposal a while back to allow for a citadel "mailbox" that would take courier deliveries from outside, sans docking rights. Seemed an inoffensive enough idea. Maybe they'll actually get around to implementing it at some point, but even if they never addressed this at all, courier contracts will continue to be a thing, and you'll just have to do a better job of managing your risk.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#594 - 2017-06-01 16:26:56 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Coralas wrote:
Aye - current status probably increased redfrog profits, since there is now another variation of scam taking out competitors and another reason for haulers to subcontract for redfrog, and another reason for customers to pay premiums.

Always amuses me when Salvos puts up the exact wrong example.


I wasnt wrong.

According to Jonah, Frog wont ship to Upwell structures unless they are on a trusted list, exactly because of how their owners can restrict access in a matter of seconds.

That leaves Upwell contracts for someone else to take the risk on.


How does one get on the Red Frog Trusted List? That is the part that would be the most interesting. Somehow they get there...how? Do some Red Frog pilots test the waters? Does Red Frog contact citadel owners wanting courier contracts and have some sort of mechanism for them to build that trust? Do citadel owners contact Red Frog and suggest a method for building trust? Some mixture of the above.

You (and others) have skipped over what is literally the most interesting part of the issue. If Red Frog has their own internal white list....how does a citadel/citadel owner get on that list?

Apparently the hauler's channel has a white and black list as well. How does one build trust in game?

"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
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#595 - 2017-06-01 16:30:23 UTC
April rabbit wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
April rabbit wrote:

Small corp is not going to have any success if this citadel is covered by Merc contracts or belongs to alts or friends of some big entity.
Example: Main Perimeter citadels. Noone attacks it because they are protected.

All in all: the whole mechanics looks like very skewed towards bigger fishes. It was always this way in 0.0 space and now high-sec has fun learning it too. However i don't see reasons to keep it intact. At least in high-sec where there should not be real need to form bigger fishes to survive.


We got it. It is too much risk for you.

Not for me, LoL Lol
I'm nullseccer and have nothing in common with high-sec citadels outside of using it for selling my stuff.


Really? Your posts smells of that of a HS carebear (and I don't mean just somebody living in HS).

April rabbit wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:

Use NPC stations. Citadels were intended to carry some level of risk with them. Even asset safety implies some level of ex ante risk.

This is what was proposed right from the start - ignoring citadels as much as possible. But some strange people argued against it.

Thanks for supporting!

Personally i believe that game mechanics deserved your "do not use it" is not good addition. But to each their own.


You shouldn't read too far between the lines. The point of my comment was for people who are so risk averse to use NPC stations, those who are willing to take risks can use citadels. These decisions are based on individual risk preferences which...as the word "individual" should indicate vary by individual.

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

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#596 - 2017-06-01 16:34:37 UTC
I see a lot of people here talking about Red Frog like they have a clue.

But they don't.

Speculate all you want guys, but RF is not going to come in here and give you info that will allow people to figure out how to bypass their filters. They have their system and it works for them. Mostly because they don't advertise what it is.

Fun to read though. So by all means, keep talking out your collective asses. If for nothing else than my personal amusement.

Mr Epeen Cool
Toobo
Project Fruit House
#597 - 2017-06-01 16:45:22 UTC
Coralas wrote:
Wrong example Salvos, not wrong factually.

The trusted list is a valuable thing in itself, and probably worth effort for legitimate citadel owners to get onto, and contracts to those citadels might comprise a large proportion of the non scam citadel destination contracts.

That is exactly the gameplay that CCP wants from citadels. its trust gameplay.



I saw this late so only commenting now this really is true. I have someone in my corp who does all the courier contract setup work. He gets loads of courier contracts fulfilled, like as in hundreds per month. When the corp look at the contract history we see a lot of names turn up again and again. We been doing this before citadels but now we get stuff moved to citadel too, and do not have issues getting our contracts fulfilled.

Of course, if it is a citadel not belonging to us, we cant stop rhe citadel owner from messing about. But I believe these guys who run our contracts regularly know that our couriers are legit and we do not set up access denial scams deliberately. It has to work in two ways. The destination citadel owner needs to be 'trustable' to allow access to non hostiles, and the contract issuer is a regular customer who would rather see his stuff arrive in destination than have the delivery fail for quick collateral isk.

In the grander scheme of things, scamming with courier contracts is not beneficial for us. We want to keep pir market segment well seeded in the target destination, and stuff arrive reliably for production. I think when this understanding and working relationships are reached between players, it does make it a very nice game play experience which feels rewarding.

Cheers Love! The cavalry's here!

Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#598 - 2017-06-01 16:45:54 UTC
Marek Kanenald wrote:
Hevymetal wrote:
This thread makes me chuckle. If some of the people posting in this thread put half the effort they have posting here into researching a contract BEFORE accpeting it we wouldn't be having a problem.

Eve is filled with scams, it's up to you to not fall for them.

As i said earlier Be thankful it's not low or null in which case insult would be added to injury by destroying your ship with it's insured cargo, then your pod, then a good laugh by the contract holder getting immediate payout (not having to wait the full duration of the contract) plus whatever loot he gets off your wreck.

NO place is safe in Eve from being scammed, killed or somehow getting yourself shafteed.


I find it funny that people like you think posters in this thread are players that got scammed.

The problem isn't that scamming with it is possible, the problem is that it basically makes the courier contract system defunct.

It also works contrary to CCP's stated goals of moving the majority of trade to citadels.


He did not say that the people protesting were getting scammed only that if people put in half as much effort as the people protesting then they'd be able to discern the scams from the legitimate courier contracts. It is a fair point in that people are advocating for a mechanic in which they do not have to expend any effort in doing courier contracts. Accept any and all (in HS) and just use the drop box. No more worrying about being locked out. Of course, what would happen to the rewards associated with courier contracts? They'd go down.

And again with that lie. Apparently Red Frog has white/black lists. Apparently so does the hauler's channel. So it seems that contracts are going to citadels. Everyone wants to just skip over the issue of building trust in a game where building trust is extremely important. After all NS alliances work off of trust that has been built. A NS alliance CEO can't do everything, so each alliance works out a way for people to build trust so that the alliance can function and not depend 100% on just 1 person.

Was CCP's intent to bring that kind of trust building to HS in some fashion via citadels? IDK and to be honest I really do not care. It is here and it can add a dimension to game play that was not there...yet everyone's first instinct is to squash it due to being overly risk averse (the I'll never ever use a citadel ever crowd--and don't get me wrong, that is their prerogative they just should foist that view [and extensions thereof] onto everyone else).

"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
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#599 - 2017-06-01 16:47:21 UTC
Toobo wrote:
Coralas wrote:
Wrong example Salvos, not wrong factually.

The trusted list is a valuable thing in itself, and probably worth effort for legitimate citadel owners to get onto, and contracts to those citadels might comprise a large proportion of the non scam citadel destination contracts.

That is exactly the gameplay that CCP wants from citadels. its trust gameplay.



I saw this late so only commenting now this really is true. I have someone in my corp who does all the courier contract setup work. He gets loads of courier contracts fulfilled, like as in hundreds per month. When the corp look at the contract history we see a lot of names turn up again and again. We been doing this before citadels but now we get stuff moved to citadel too, and do not have issues getting our contracts fulfilled.



What, what, WAT!!?!?!?!? That is impossible, so many in this thread have said so!!!

Clearly you are mistaken or even worse lying! [/sarcasm]

"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

Toobo
Project Fruit House
#600 - 2017-06-01 16:51:38 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
I see a lot of people here talking about Red Frog like they have a clue.

But they don't.

Speculate all you want guys, but RF is not going to come in here and give you info that will allow people to figure out how to bypass their filters. They have their system and it works for them. Mostly because they don't advertise what it is.

Fun to read though. So by all means, keep talking out your collective asses. If for nothing else than my personal amusement.

Mr Epeen Cool



I see it now. YOU are the filter! Shocked

Cheers Love! The cavalry's here!