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!

No no no, you don't get it, I already addressed these stupid comments, that this is just part of the game, at some point you need step back and stop being a kiss and realize this is a flawed mechanic, the only people defending this are people who are abusing it to make money.

I bet you anything they already intend to fix this issue, I just needed to have my voice be heard because it's such an irresponsible thing to allow, much like plex being destroyable (bought with IRL) is no longer destroyable, why? because they are bringing in tens of thousands of new players and they know crap like that is not acceptable in today's market.

Eve online is old and it may have legacy players hanging around, but odds are after this revival there are going to be far more new players then old and things will have to change to be less "hardcore" and well to be honest bullshit.

Why would CCP change it? It was the same way for Null Stations and Outpost, why wouldn't Citadels be the same way? If you look at the contact destination it says "Destination may not be accessible." or some such thing.

Ha, good luck getting anyone to agree to that statement here. Sometimes I seriously believe that the 'leave-everything-as-it-is' crowd is just depressed and hopeless that EVE could ever grow large. Its either that or playing eve feeds a superiority complex, but in truth EVE is easy, you guys are no different or better than any other MMO community.

Jesus man how many times do I need to repeat to you that I don't want to ruin your game before it gets through to you. I have no power over the course of the games development more than my voice on these forums, here I can influence others.

Stop stalking me dude.

Free will =Progress.

Some citadels will become well known for honest trading while other will be avoided or blown up... you never know who are you scamming :)

Gameplay wise you have a dude posting memes on reddit while turning on and off a switch. Do you consider that challenging gameplay? Or gameplay at all?

Barricading your house so the mail delivery man can't give you a package and then suing him because he didn't deliver that package should not be a thing.

Because there should be a balance between mechanics and player interactions.

Having ****** courier mechanics is on the wrong side of that balance. Trade is a basic function of the game and this mechanical abuse is contrary to CCP's stated goal of moving trade to citadels.


Why not give citadel owners the ability to just confiscate everything in their citadel? Simple, it would be **** and nobody would use citadels. But of course you would have your super 1337 pro player interactions.

Yeah perhaps if it actually took effort to do so and not just have a magical button deny the delivery.

Perhaps the absence of big wars in eve is justified by the presence of petty shennanigans like the ones you defend, and pass as "ruthless and harsh gameplay", considered that?

The tools we, as players have are broken. Citadels are too cheap and easy to build and losing one means absolutely nothing. Due to game mechanics you can build 10 other citadels under the comfortable anonymate of other alts, while one is being destroyed.

The difficulty or lack thereof is exactly our business if the game does not offer the means to effectively counter it.

The "you sound like" argument you come up with is pathetic to say the least.

And like I said there SHOULD be a balance.

Do you think it would be fine if I could gank a freighter in an Ibis?

People like you pretend oversights and balance issues do not exist ever. Everything is fine and nothing should ever change.

CCP should look at this themselves and determine if these mechanics are in line with the role they intend for citadels.

There are way to effectively counter the profit from ganking. There are no ways to counter a design flaw.

Why do you try to divert the conversation towards ganking because it isn't the same issue.

In a gank there are only two involved parts.

In the matter we discuss there are three, and currently there is no way for a legit entrepreneur (or for an entrepreneur with malign intentions) to build a long term project, due to the certain mechanics. CCP staff has mentioned they would like to induce a transition of trade from npc stations to player owned structures, with all the risk resulting from it. In the current environment the transition is practically impossible.

Please do take your time and consider that point of view.

I don't see how a delivery box would make life difficult for anyone. Or how would it make it safer for the rest. It only removes an exploit.

That's perfectly fine.

If CCP don't respond these 'lazy' people will just leave and go elsewhere. I know you don't have a problem with that but to me having a constant bleed of players cannot be good for the games health.

Yes CCP have failed changes in the past, but that is no reason to stop.

CCP should be learning how to make better changes through their experience. Not simply giving up out of fear as you would have us do.

A bad player (one that we want to purge) will be scammed once and take to the forums to berate CCP for allowing them to be so stupid, claiming that whatever mistake they just made is driving away new players and killing EvE.

There is a big red warning that you get when you consider accepting this type contract telling you that you might not be able to complete it because the destination is player owned. What more do you need?

Jenn, well said otherwise, but come on.

Its not just HS enjoying the mechanics there, its everyone else too exploiting it with even greater leverage.

HS is a playground for NS.

Everyone knows this.

Ill buy that once transit between HS markets and NS suppliers is remedied with sufficient risk.

I already addressed the Citadel/courier scam being legit.

Simple.
Dont accept courier contracts to Citadels you dont trust.
Case closed.

This has to do with the rest of your rhetoric regarding the relationship in mechanics between HS exploitation by NS.

Church of HTFU

Is that your best shot?

I see how you couched your question. Are you working for a losing political party? Your tactics and rhetoric is how you get the opposite results of your expectations.

What do you have against real risk and cost in a game that is sold on those ideas? But it is just a game after all. When you log off you are nobody. Like everybody else.

I have lived in NS.

What is your next shot?

Also critique for not having tried many things in the game?
Is this EVE we are talking about again?
There is an endless amount of things to try.
Do you claim to have tried them all, Ms. PvE?

Watch this video and notice how many warnings there are of the bridge height, and how it doesn't help. If they raised the bridge, problem solved.

This is relevant to eve where many mechanics exist to trip you up, with some warning, where a better solution would be fixing the mechanic in question.

You can't patch out stupid.

As a result everyone wanting to remove this mechanic are implicitly rewarding stupid.

Good job.

Disastrous how? You just repeat yourself that 'catering to the stupid' is going to kill eve. This video proves the world is full of stupid people, who don't read warnings. They'll still complain when their reality comes crashing down. If you don't want the complaints in the first place, you design to tolerate 'stupid' people. Now of course, this is not to say 'make eve simple', but it is to say that there should be a shallow end where stupid people can be themselves and have a good time.

This has been the case with null outposts for over a decade, why should the game change to protect people unwilling to take a loss when they take a risk?

What some people in this thread advice is "The counter is simple, don't accept citadel contracts." That's like telling a new player don't go to null there are bubbles instead of advising him to fit a ceptor. That's a bear set of mind.

Yeah I know, I don't haul so don't really care.

What bothers me is the lack of consequence for some actions and introduction of fail/risk proof mechanics; like magical structure invulnerability except for a short period when the loot fairy pops up on grid with a rabbit foot in her hand and starts shaking it, puppy leashes that also make ships magically invulnerable etc etc etc.

As far as I'm concerned if there is an amount of risk then it should reflect/affect on everyone. Otherwise it is just an overlooked exploit sustained by convenient arguments.

No, I dont dislike citadels, only some mechanics that were introduced along.

The ganker argument is false. Gankers lose their ships in the process, lose security status and have to avoid local gate/station station police to travel. There is a consequence to their actions and there are ways to prevent or even counter being ganked.

The argument of antigankers is probably catalysts are cheap but so is replacing a retriever. I'm pretty sure a bot miner doesn't really care about losing a ship or two because the profit makes it inconspicuous. There's nothing that can't be solved in Eve through the hardening the f up and making another alt. This highly intelligent adaptive process is available to both gankers and miners.

Why do you keep comparing me with the antigankers?

In Frosty's words "There's no risk for the scammer other than messing up a contract". That's just one sided gameplay.

"There is no risk for the ganker, the catalyst getting CONCORDED is insignifigant"


You just mentioned a loss. Insignifiant YOU SAY, but a LOSS none the less.

SO it is YOU the one who considers losing a catalyst insignifiant. Not me.


All your preconceptions about my posts come from comparing my arguments with antigankers' and that is all the demeanor of your posting. You want to divert an eventual debate about game mechanic exploits towards a certain zone oozing of subjectivity.

I can do that too you know. I can compare you with the people in the T3c rebalance thread where the supreme argument is CCPlease dun nurf mah pwnmobile.

Because basically that's what you, your alts and other two or three players are trying to do in this thread:

Crying CCPlease dont nerf my scam mobile.

I'm not losing anything, I objectively stick on to a topic. You and others, and since it is the same subjective discourse you all employ I'm going to suspect alts at work, keep diverting it towards a different meaning. Lacking logical arguments and making comparisons only valid to your biased perspective.

If you don't scam why are you posting here at all?

My pov on this thread is debathing wether there's a risk element that affect both parties involved in a pvp activity. Simple and succint. Please bring up objective arguments that support the reason for which an involved party should be invulnerable and don't pull up subjective comparisons. The fact that we liked other posts means just that our opinions converged on other subjects but it doesn't mean they can't differ.

Its not possible to do that. Scams rely on asymmetric risk. Otherwise the scammer would ultimately fail to profit from scamming over any longer term.

The fundamental asymmetry is knowledge of the difference between collateral value and real value of the hauled object.

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

meh, I have only one thing to say to that.

HTFU

What issue do you have with a delay on changing standing/access settings in Upwell structures?

Its their stuff. Why should they have to wait 5-20 days to get it out.

Put your stuff in NPC stations and you will not have to deal with any of this. Nobody can lock you out of Jita 4-4 Caldari Navy bla bla bla because it's owned by NPCs.

Other tweaks

Added a "show info" context menu option for search results containing one item.
Create contract wizard has been simplified a bit.
Item Exchange Contracts now have a different icon. We repurposed the "freeform" contract icon for this type of contract.
If you accept any type of contract you should be correctly notified if the station(s) are player-owned and not reachable.
Metalevels of items should now be correctly displayed everywhere in contracts.
You can now preview items from the contracts details window.
Contracts should now open up more quickly than before. No more 'shuffling through the pile'.
A bunch of other small fixes have been added here and there.

LOL!

You are reaching more than Jenn on that one.

Mr Epeen

We have been over this, a citadel unanchors for 7 days. Get some buddies and go shoot it. Hire some mercs and have them shoot it. Go impose costs and risk on the scammer

Complaining about trolling while trolling.

You mad, bro?

Mr Epeen

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.

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.

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.

BAHAHAHA, holy crap, very happy to see things don't change much.

But on the other hand I feel like quite a few things got hammered away inch by inch. Each time most people felt it was a sensible decision that CCP made, 'for the good of the game'. But after years, with an accumulated list of such little things that got taken away, things do feel a bit different, for me anyways. :p

Wow, now I am impressed.

Hey everyone, Dracvlad does not live in HS! Aren't you all impressed.

I can't help but notice the pattern with these people. Take ANY topic in Eve, does not matter what it is, where someone says that some mechanic or rule could use some review, and this is the pattern that emerges:


- Church of HTFU, no matter what the topic, will say that there is no change needed
- Then will say that it's not the mechanic or rule but it's "the bads" who "can't play the game"
-- then comes some of the "downward comparison" tactics usually laced with
--- "I think it's OK everybody who does not is carebear/loser/weak/risk averse/stupid"
--- Thus: already and automatically better than everybody who agrees with the OP and using every argument in favor of it as evidence of that which is silently claimed (but cannot be disputed because it's never outright claimed).

It's funny seeing how their little brain hamsters just keep going on that wheel. We can see right through them, which is why they pretend not to notice when we fire a contrarian shot across their bow.

But they are not arguing with us, or even an OP in such a thread. They are arguing with everybody they hate, because they need to, to feel better about themselves.

Sometimes I want to ask "show me on the doll where democracy/the unwashed masses who are beneath your ubermenchness/your parents/your ex girlfriend/cause and effect/being outnumbered by dumb people hurt you". Hey I can relate. Perhaps these people are so helpless in life that their only recourse is to come here and do what they do? Their posts nothing more than desperate cries against the unstoppable forces in their lives, like the condemned cursing against the wall he's facing while the firing squad is too busy to hear over the shots.

Are they so powerless to tell people what to do that they just have to do it here?

But whatever they are at war with, or what motivates them, they are not going to defeat it in a game. And certainly not going to beat it in a game forum.

Salvos is right: everything is indeed fine.

Conclusion: don't deliver to citadels. There. Fixed. Everything is fine. And those who are hurfing and blurfing about "well you can deliver to citadels just read the contract" need to be told they can't tell people what to do, ever. Simply not delivering to citadels instead of pouring through contracts will work every time.