| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nicolai Serkanner
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
681
   |
Posted - 2017.05.07 10:35:10 -
[1] - Quote
Jin Kugu wrote:I just got owned. http://imgur.com/a/F2tMT
Not by some smart player or my own mistake. I got owned because someone providing a high sec service went afk. I now have a pod stuck in a citadel that has run out of fuel. I left my HG snakes there yesterday and today I can't jump back to it. This is ****** design because it basically forces every single player to drop a cloning citadel they control. There's no way for a me to find out when a citadel I have a clone in might go offline due to afk owners. Now if the player had locked me out and asked me to pay him or just to **** me, that's fair game. He runs a service and scams me, whatever. This is not the case though and I feel it needs a change. Any ideas? tl;dr pour one out for my HG snake set
Works as intended.
|
Nicolai Serkanner
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
681
|
Posted - 2017.05.07 12:17:05 -
[2] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Nicolai Serkanner wrote:Jin Kugu wrote:I just got owned. http://imgur.com/a/F2tMT
Not by some smart player or my own mistake. I got owned because someone providing a high sec service went afk. I now have a pod stuck in a citadel that has run out of fuel. I left my HG snakes there yesterday and today I can't jump back to it. This is ****** design because it basically forces every single player to drop a cloning citadel they control. There's no way for a me to find out when a citadel I have a clone in might go offline due to afk owners. Now if the player had locked me out and asked me to pay him or just to **** me, that's fair game. He runs a service and scams me, whatever. This is not the case though and I feel it needs a change. Any ideas? tl;dr pour one out for my HG snake set Works as intended. Nah, working as designed, not intended. Like much of what CCP has done lately, this is another of those things that just wasn't thought through very well. I don't think CCP ever intended for a player leaving the game or going AFK for a long period to cause active players to lose things. They just never thought about it..
I disagree.
|
Nicolai Serkanner
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
681
|
Posted - 2017.05.07 18:05:48 -
[3] - Quote
Jin Kugu wrote:Nicolai Serkanner wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Nicolai Serkanner wrote:Jin Kugu wrote:I just got owned. http://imgur.com/a/F2tMT
Not by some smart player or my own mistake. I got owned because someone providing a high sec service went afk. I now have a pod stuck in a citadel that has run out of fuel. I left my HG snakes there yesterday and today I can't jump back to it. This is ****** design because it basically forces every single player to drop a cloning citadel they control. There's no way for a me to find out when a citadel I have a clone in might go offline due to afk owners. Now if the player had locked me out and asked me to pay him or just to **** me, that's fair game. He runs a service and scams me, whatever. This is not the case though and I feel it needs a change. Any ideas? tl;dr pour one out for my HG snake set Works as intended. Nah, working as designed, not intended. Like much of what CCP has done lately, this is another of those things that just wasn't thought through very well. I don't think CCP ever intended for a player leaving the game or going AFK for a long period to cause active players to lose things. They just never thought about it.. I disagree. What a well reasoned argument. The design is **** whether ccp thought about it or not.
I disagree.
|
Nicolai Serkanner
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
681
|
Posted - 2017.05.07 19:40:00 -
[4] - Quote
Obsidian Blacke wrote:This was obviously something CCP overlooked. A clone is an asset, and should be subject to some type of asset safety.
Obviously not. A clone is not an "asset". You can neither transport or sell/buy it. OP was dumb to leave a clone in a place out of her control and now blames CCP for it.
|
Nicolai Serkanner
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
681
|
Posted - 2017.05.07 19:41:45 -
[5] - Quote
Jin Kugu wrote:The design flaw is pretty obvious though.
1. Having clones in citadels has a lot of benifits
2. You have no idea when someone might go afk(ignoring the risk of getting scammed outright)
3. You are forced to only use personal clone citadels
I just dropped a personal citadel 1j from Jita and you should do it too. Bonus points if you freeport it to intensify the overview spam.
You making a dumb mistake doesnt make this a design fault.
1. Indeed.
2. Indeed, so how do you deal with such a situation?
3. Nonsense! |
Nicolai Serkanner
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
686
|
Posted - 2017.05.08 17:28:02 -
[6] - Quote
Obsidian Blacke wrote:Nicolai Serkanner wrote:Obsidian Blacke wrote:This was obviously something CCP overlooked. A clone is an asset, and should be subject to some type of asset safety. Obviously not. A clone is not an "asset". You can neither transport or sell/buy it. OP was dumb to leave a clone in a place out of her control and now blames CCP for it. A clone is obviously an asset. Also, you can sell and buy them. It happens all the time. Clones have value, and replacement value. Learn to Eve, bra.
Please contract me one of your clones. |
Nicolai Serkanner
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
686
|
Posted - 2017.05.08 17:30:09 -
[7] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Falken Falcon wrote:Scipio Artelius wrote:Obsidian Blacke wrote:... asset safety should not exist at all. I agree. Remove it completely. It wasn't part of the original design for Citadels and there is no gameplay involved in everything going to safety. Having lost an expensive clone in a similar manner to the OP, it's a risk we take if we store expensive clones in Citadels we don't own (or in my case, we do). More fool us, if we suffer consequences of that choice. I actually agree with scipper here. No asset safety got me very exited back in the day. The citadels would have felt more like your shack far in the void that you must defend when some dude comes knocking or you would lose your ship and the shack. Now its just the value of the shack while you can just courier your stuff somewhere by paying the loot fairy a small fee while she keeps your stuff safely in her trunk. I got alot of crap I can keep around without any worry of actually losing it. Worst case is I just find them at some borderline highsec system Dont get me wrong i do understand why CCP added the asset safety, but the 15% magic courier cost is bit low as it does not feel like I should be worried about if a station I got stuff in goes boom For the 2 narrow minded posters. Just how many players do you think would use Citadels to live out of without asset safety? I would bet every asset i own neither of you would. Falcen, I think you might want to go have a look at how asset safety works. Your stuff won't end up in "some highsec station" unless it originates in highsec. Best case IF you live in nul, it will end up in some random Nul NPC station. If you live in lowsec, it will go to the nearest Lowsec NPC station. Scipio - There is a big difference in losing a clone because you can't defend your citadel and losing one because the owner leaves the game.
You calling somebody narrow-minded is THE joke of the year. |
Nicolai Serkanner
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
686
|
Posted - 2017.05.08 17:31:14 -
[8] - Quote
Fish Hunter wrote:000Hunter000 wrote:sooo... u put your expensive item inside a destroyable player owned item and now your complaining you lost it huh?
This is risk vs reward i think. Did u have any benefit of putting the clone in this citadel?
I do agree though, that ccp could arrange it that your clone is transfered to the nearest usable cloningstation. No, CCP has stated that when citadels go boom so does your clone so there's your risk. The clones should work like outposts, you can be kicked from docking and having it as your home station but can always jump to the clone to retrieve it. There's no warning to anyone but station owner when fuel runs out or removing the clone module, when its being attacked everyone gets to see its reinforced.
No, a citadel is not a station or outpost. Try again.
|
Nicolai Serkanner
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
686
|
Posted - 2017.05.08 17:33:54 -
[9] - Quote
Fish Hunter wrote:Scipio Artelius wrote:Obsidian Blacke wrote:... asset safety should not exist at all. I agree. Remove it completely. It wasn't part of the original design for Citadels and there is no gameplay involved in everything going to safety. Having lost an expensive clone in a similar manner to the OP, it's a risk we take if we store expensive clones in Citadels we don't own (or in my case, we do). More fool us, if we suffer consequences of that choice. Asset safety is there because CCP decided thats what it would take to move industrialists into citadels completely. As well they're removing outposts in which assets are immune though possibly stuck for eternity, and you might say its a fair trade. Players at first used citadel clone services because it was easy and often cheaper. Now that everyone is realizing how dangerous it is players are stopping use of them which is the opposite of what CCP wants.
When Outposts and POSes are removed there is no need for asset safety any more because you can not chose to use an alternative. I agree the game should get rid of asset safety altogether. It is a horrible "feature" and has been from the beginning.
|
| |
|