EVE Search - August release - Contracts in Citadels

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

August release - Contracts in Citadels

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 11 post(s)

CCP Habakuk C C P C C P Alliance 1571	Posted - 2016.07.29 14:23:31 - [1] - Quote 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 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 CCP Habakuk \| EVE Quality Assurance \| Team Five 0 \| (Team Gridlock) Bug reporting \| Mass Testing

Grookshank Jump Drive Appreciation Society 116	Posted - 2016.07.29 14:35:48 - [2] - Quote Max items (total) in a contract still caps at 2000. Can we get an increase to something like 5000?
Zappity Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 2910	Posted - 2016.07.29 14:52:07 - [3] - Quote 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 Jump Drive Appreciation Society 116	Posted - 2016.07.29 14:55:53 - [4] - Quote 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 Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 2910	Posted - 2016.07.29 15:25:49 - [5] - Quote 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 141	Posted - 2016.07.29 15:32:26 - [6] - Quote 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 578	Posted - 2016.07.29 15:46:09 - [7] - Quote 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 0	Posted - 2016.07.29 16:04:30 - [8] - Quote 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 Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 2910	Posted - 2016.07.29 16:13:41 - [9] - Quote 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 1574	Posted - 2016.07.29 16:14:35 - [10] - Quote 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 1576	Posted - 2016.07.29 16:39:33 - [11] - Quote 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 51	Posted - 2016.07.29 17:06:40 - [12] - Quote I was hoping we'd see more flexibility with contract length. Speed of delivery is sometimes really important. The increased size limit is sensible, given the changes to freighters. Trade Hub Price Checker: https://stop.hammerti.me.uk/ Visit "Haulers Channel" in game for all matters courier-related.
Wibla Tactical Narcotics Team 164	Posted - 2016.07.29 17:06:45 - [13] - Quote 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 2	Posted - 2016.07.29 17:09:14 - [14] - Quote 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 .

CCP Habakuk C C P C C P Alliance 1578	Posted - 2016.07.29 17:18:34 - [15] - Quote Messenger Of Truth wrote: I was hoping we'd see more flexibility with contract length. 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 0	Posted - 2016.07.29 17:26:49 - [16] - Quote CCP Habakuk wrote: Messenger Of Truth wrote: I was hoping we'd see more flexibility with contract length. 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 540	Posted - 2016.07.29 17:29:37 - [17] - Quote 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. Planning a trip to Thera? Check out http://eve-scout.com/ for a list of the current connections. Once you've made your choice, join the *EvE-Scout* channel and request a scout to make sure your connection is clear!
Lillian Dekar Omni Galactic Central Omni Galactic Group 0	Posted - 2016.07.29 17:31:21 - [18] - Quote 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 1578	Posted - 2016.07.29 17:31:28 - [19] - Quote 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 1578	Posted - 2016.07.29 17:34:14 - [20] - Quote 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


Careby 282	Posted - 2016.07.29 17:56:50 - [21] - Quote Lillian Dekar wrote: ...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... Depending on how it is implemented... Imagine a courier contract to deliver a full freighter to a nice, quiet, private citadel where the freighter cannot tether and... well, use your imagination to finish the story.
Wibla Tactical Narcotics Team 164	Posted - 2016.07.29 18:04:09 - [22] - Quote CCP Habakuk wrote: Messenger Of Truth wrote: I was hoping we'd see more flexibility with contract length. 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? I don't really care either way (200 vs 500 items) only that it'd be more convenient with 500 for the few times I actually make contracts with a ton of items. Being able to see assets in citadels in the API is way more important imo.
Jovian Disease Red Frog Freight Red-Frog 0	Posted - 2016.07.29 18:17:46 - [23] - Quote are we going to be able to set destination to a citadel from saved bookmarks after this patch ?
Lyn Fel Black Frog Logistics Red-Frog 131	Posted - 2016.07.29 18:19:20 - [24] - Quote CCP Habakuk wrote: Ability to finish a contract from outside a citadel without docking access: Will very likely be added in a follow-up patch You really need to be able to complete the contract with any pilot carrying the contract in their cargo since the freighter (or other ship) pilot moving the contract is often not the same as the character who accepted the original contract. This feature does not minimize the risk of losing docking rights en route otherwise.
King Creator Out of Focus Odin's Call 28	Posted - 2016.07.29 18:25:50 - [25] - Quote Has there also been discussion or any progress on having assets in a citadel show in your api?
Airi Cho Dark-Rising Wrecking Machine. 157	Posted - 2016.07.29 18:27:56 - [26] - Quote Jovian Disease wrote: are we going to be able to set destination to a citadel from saved bookmarks after this patch ? sounds useful.
Grookshank Jump Drive Appreciation Society 116	Posted - 2016.07.29 18:38:56 - [27] - Quote Can we get some info on contract taxes and broker fees? They seem to be the same on SiSi right now.

CCP Habakuk C C P C C P Alliance 1581	Posted - 2016.07.29 18:48:57 - [28] - Quote "able to set destination to a citadel from saved bookmarks" - I'll investigate after the weekend Assets API: I'll ask around after the weekend, but this is not really for my team and I am not sure what is possible there. Grookshank wrote: Can we get some info on contract taxes and broker fees? They seem to be the same on SiSi right now. Nothing changed regarding taxes and broker fees (everything goes to NPCs). CCP Habakuk \| EVE Quality Assurance \| Team Five 0 \| (Team Gridlock) Bug reporting \| Mass Testing

Tau Cabalander Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs 6302	Posted - 2016.07.29 19:28:04 - [29] - Quote Anything happening on the contracts-front in general? Feedback request on Contract system I particularly still would like to see skills for more personal contracts.
Andrew Xadi Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 1	Posted - 2016.07.29 20:25:59 - [30] - Quote CCP Habakuk wrote: Contract search: Contracts in Citadels without docking access are hidden by default (through the "exclude unreachable" filter) Will it also work for contracts in outposts you don't have access to til they'll be deleted, and will there also be option for it in regional market window?



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.