| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Marcus Gideon
Gallente
Excessive Force
   |
Posted - 2008.07.16 23:37:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Gabriel Darkefyre
I'm seeing where some of the crossed wires are here in this idea.
The collateral limits would be an upper limit as to what Interbus would entrust you with.
So with your example of 1 Billion Isk worth of Mission Loot remember that it's 1 Billion across maybe thousands of items, so, for example, someone with a collateral limit would be restricted to only being able to carry cargo with a total collateral equalling his limit. Say that he had a limit of 200 Million. Then he could do your entire contract in 5 runs.
However, say you had a Juicy Officer Mod (for Example) in the middle of that loot that you've valued for Collateral at 500 Million for that item alone, Then no matter how much room he had in his hold he couldn't touch it until he's more trusted with Interbus (How do you get more trusted? Successfully complete Hauling runs. Closer to your limit you get the better the Standing Increases would be.)
Does this help to explain better what the premise of this idea is?
Now this part I don't like. That's saying that Courier contracts are a faction mission now. And no one can even attempt to run them until they have started running NPC missions for Interbus first.
I'd say, as far as the Collateral of a mass shipment with a single pricy item is concerned... put a single amount on the whole package, or list the pricy stuff separately.
Going back to my suggestion before.
Whether you're asking to trek a huge load of Veld, or a single Mega... you're asking for 200bil Collateral. So yes, I do think that the reward should be the same for both contracts. But the reward should reflect the value of the cargo AS WELL AS the travel involved. So either shipment, carried entirely through High Sec, wouldn't require as much of a default Reward, as they would if carried through Low/Null Sec.
Routes are calculated on a contract when you list pickup and delivery. So the Reward is calculated based on the safest/shortest route between. If a hauler can't enter High Sec due to standings, or wants to dip into Low Sec for a shortcut... that's on them.
---
Don't take my rantings personally. I may just be arguing the topic... unless you're saying something stupid, and then I mean every word. |
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.07.17 00:34:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Gabriel Darkefyre
I'm seeing where some of the crossed wires are here in this idea.
The collateral limits would be an upper limit as to what Interbus would entrust you with.
So with your example of 1 Billion Isk worth of Mission Loot remember that it's 1 Billion across maybe thousands of items, so, for example, someone with a collateral limit would be restricted to only being able to carry cargo with a total collateral equalling his limit. Say that he had a limit of 200 Million. Then he could do your entire contract in 5 runs.
However, say you had a Juicy Officer Mod (for Example) in the middle of that loot that you've valued for Collateral at 500 Million for that item alone, Then no matter how much room he had in his hold he couldn't touch it until he's more trusted with Interbus (How do you get more trusted? Successfully complete Hauling runs. Closer to your limit you get the better the Standing Increases would be.)
Does this help to explain better what the premise of this idea is?
That changes the mechanics of it, but it doesn't change my objection. You don't need InterBus to protect you from theft, this is the purpose of collateral. If you want to make courier contracts be InterBus missions and give standing, and then have an option for the paranoid to put a minimum InterBus standing on their courier, I'm fine with that in principle(though I wonder how it'd interact with the NPC agents InterBus has). But there should be no forced limits on people doing couriers - I don't want people being barred from accepting my contract, when they have the ability to carry it out, just because they're lacking NPC standings. I don't care if they're -10 to every corp in the game, I want them to either get my stuff moved or pay me the collateral(and I don't much care which).
Also, what happens if it was an officer mod worth over a billion? What if I want to entrust a Titan BPO to a courier contract? Put down 63B, and I'll let you carry it for me gladly. Deliver it, or I buy a new one and come out a half-billion ahead - no skin off my back. I don't need InterBus to protect me, the collateral section is already there.
------------------
Fix the forums! |
Gabriel Darkefyre
Minmatar
Crystal Ship
|
Posted - 2008.07.17 09:19:00 -
[33]
So, we're agreed that we'd like to see more functionality in the contract system.
Hearing your arguements concerning the Manditory Collateral Caps has convinced me that that part of the idea wasn't such a good idea so that can be quietly dropped. I do like the idea of the contract creator being able to set a Minimum Interbus Standing to accept his contract.
So for this idea:-
Pros
- You know precicely what you're hauling so can easily determine if the Collateral set is reasonable for the cargo.
- Anonimity protects both parties in the contract, Hauler has no idea who he's hauling for, Contractor has no idea as to who's accepted the Contract.
- Would make it much quicker for setting up large contracts with multiple items to multiple destinations.
- Would allow people a way to build up faction standings with Interbus with a knock on effect with derived standings, something people have been asking for as a way of digging their characters out of a standings pit with various factions.
Cons
- Would require a major overhaul of the Contract system, these aren't simple changes.
- Scams would be harder to pull off as it would be easier to spot them.
- Would only really work for Courier Contracts, Other Parts of the Contract System would need their own fixes.
|
Epitrope
The Citadel Manufacturing and Trade Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.07.28 23:13:00 -
[34]
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
The 10% increment in bids is agreed to be too high a percentage, but it should not be too low either otherwise it would turn into 0.01 warfare. The CSM is tasked to determine the appropriate percentage and relay it back to CCP, who will analyze it and adjust the percentage.
It seems unfair to me that the CSM should somehow figure out a percentage on their own. CCP Dr.EyjoG, being an economist, should at least be asked about this - it would appear to fall squarely in his domain.
|
Darwin's Market
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 12:10:00 -
[35]
You should not be able to see other people's personal contracts.
|
Tehopenee
|
Posted - 2008.09.05 20:21:00 -
[36]
I was curious about the many scam contracts that you see in contracts. I was wondering why ccp has never just looked at them and dropped the scam ones and fine the people responsible. I would think it would not take a great deal of time. I mean how hard is it to see wtb useing the cents as major numbers--some guys will have 10 or more in a row. We get told buyer beware because we cant be bothered with you being cheated. Well, they dont really say that but it is the attitude you get. Was just wondering. :)
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.09.06 06:07:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Tehopenee
I was curious about the many scam contracts that you see in contracts. I was wondering why ccp has never just looked at them and dropped the scam ones and fine the people responsible. I would think it would not take a great deal of time. I mean how hard is it to see wtb useing the cents as major numbers--some guys will have 10 or more in a row. We get told buyer beware because we cant be bothered with you being cheated. Well, they dont really say that but it is the attitude you get. Was just wondering. :)
Scamming is legit in Eve. Caveat emptor, and all that.
------------------
Fix the forums! |
Holy Lowlander
Aurora Acclivitous
|
Posted - 2008.09.06 07:04:00 -
[38]
give me an option to filter away Want to Buy orders. And I'm happy. Its a real pain if you want to look for a ship ....
Quote:
woot I wants a toy arbitrator !!! :O
|
Karando
Random Goods
|
Posted - 2008.09.06 13:03:00 -
[39]
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
They want the CSM and the players to think about the direction the contract system should take, and are open to suggestions and improvements.
Let me think about it... **** your carebear-ideas and instead remove all warnings on contracts (including freeform warnings). Sounds good, eh?
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.09.06 15:03:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Holy Lowlander
give me an option to filter away Want to Buy orders. And I'm happy. Its a real pain if you want to look for a ship ....
That's easy enough to do - set a minimum price of zero.
------------------
Fix the forums! |
sukio
|
Posted - 2008.09.06 21:30:00 -
[41]
I would LOVE to do massive courier hauling but the current setup is highly corupt and flawed
many courier are either bait runs to get a hauler into low sec so that the shipper can blow them up and ALSO get the BOND.
or they are fixed scams,, cans with huge single container cargos that 99% of the players impossible to haul forcing them to fail and loose their huge bonds
and lastly these courier missions are way too vulnerable to pirates its like the courier system was designed to benefit PVPers and to hurt shippers and haulers.
you need to have alot more sorters and filters INCLUDING low sec filters and odd sized cargos
If I were you to make the system functional and enjoyable I would take the real object out of the equasion: make it so that the shipper (at least in highsec space) has 100% reliability in the shipping system make it more of a POSTAL system.
have shippers buy boxes based on size,distance,risk,and special handling instructions (like rush or fedex)
they could also set up bulk shipping contracts that would emulate single m3 boxes so that any number of shippers could cooperate in getting the shipment to its destonation only limited by their cargobay size.
IF a hauler is blowup or leaves the game, whatever,,, the box would return to the origin after a preset time to be shiped by another hauler,,, it is even possible for a pirate to still blow up a hauler and deliver the shipment himself for the hauling fee.
this would mean that PVPers or scammers would not be able to profit from haulers as much but it would function and be enjoyable which it is not right now unless you want to risk 25 million isk to make 15,000 isk
EVE PVP is out of control and is hurting EVE and CCP |
sukio
|
Posted - 2008.09.06 21:48:00 -
[42]
3) This would allow a battleship to be moved in a hauler over the course of 10 trips. This seems obviously wrong. The size cap does need to go up, but breaking down has to be limited by the contents of the package.
he did say ore and minerals when he stated his example,, use some common sense,, he obviously didnt mean breaking down a battleship or capital ship into tiny little loads!
EVE PVP is out of control and is hurting EVE and CCP |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |