open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Why 0.0 courier is not worth it.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6

Author Topic

Rashmika Clavain
Gallente
Posted - 2009.09.08 12:58:00 - [91]
 

Of all teh things wrong with EVE, you're whining over a Contract Courier scam that's been around for as long as.

**** me.

Zartanic
Posted - 2009.09.08 15:01:00 - [92]
 

Originally by: Rashmika Clavain
Of all teh things wrong with EVE, you're whining over a Contract Courier scam that's been around for as long as.

**** me.



It is funny. You get players moan about something as if its all new and they have discovered someone using an obscure game mechanic. A few minutes research would show every possible contract scam in the book that's been going for years (and as said it may not be a scam anyway)

In this game buyer beware. There is no Unfair Contract Terms Act or Sale of Good Act.

Also CCP recently removed free form contracts yet left the rest alone, and for good reason.


Glengrant
Beyond Limited
Posted - 2009.09.08 15:05:00 - [93]
 

Originally by: Enkidu Uruksen
I think there should be a way to find out whether you have docking rights at an outpost without going there. Somebody said "You don't, unless it's in Providence." The last time I was at the EC-P8R outpost (Pure Blind) it was also open to anybody docking. Is it now? I don't know. I don't know how to find out without going there, either.

Do you?



This is very very simple:
If the destination is an outpost
a) you belong to that alliance or have a prior agreement - then yo already know you know beforehand that you have docking rights
b) if not a) then you don't have docking rights. (couple exceptions are exceptions and not worth muddling the issue with)

Dramaan
Posted - 2009.09.08 15:34:00 - [94]
 

Only way to ccp to fix this is to enforce a special pass in courier contracts that alows you in but it shoud only work once if you
undock even if you not delivered you shod not be able dock agen that is only solution ccp can do if they which a solution
to fix it.
But i think it will stay as it is for now you can search what is name of station.

Agent Known
Posted - 2009.09.08 15:40:00 - [95]
 

TLDR: If it's 0.0 and you're not in the destination alliance, don't bother with the contract. This doesn't apply to NPC outposts, but just keep that in mind. Cool

Oh, and some courier contracts may be traps; i.e, victim accepts contract, contractor sets up camp and blows up said victim. YARRRR!!

Iria Ahrens
Amarr
Ministry of War
Posted - 2009.09.08 16:17:00 - [96]
 

Edited by: Iria Ahrens on 08/09/2009 16:33:11
Originally by: Agent Known
TLDR: If it's 0.0 and you're not in the destination alliance, don't bother with the contract. This doesn't apply to NPC outposts, but just keep that in mind. Cool

Oh, and some courier contracts may be traps; i.e, victim accepts contract, contractor sets up camp and blows up said victim. YARRRR!!


If you really suspect a trap, just accept the contract and wait 10 hours or so before running it. Actually, I never accept a 0.0 contract then head to the origin station. I go into the station first, accept and run for it. Find a point halfway and stop there for several hours before completing the contract. The telltale of a trap to me is a very short duration for delivery. If I can deliver anytime in the next week, then I'll use timing to disrupt any potential trap.


Originally by: Dramaan
Only way to ccp to fix this is to enforce a special pass in courier contracts that alows you in but it shoud only work once if you
undock even if you not delivered you shod not be able dock agen that is only solution ccp can do if they which a solution
to fix it.
But i think it will stay as it is for now you can search what is name of station.


Now THAT would be an exploit. Enemy allinaces would be using it all the time to spy on enemy stations.

Sorry, no. Definitive no. This is not a fix. The fix is engage brain before accepting contract.

Really, this whining is getting to me. Aren't there any problem solvers out there? Winning in EVE is about being a problem solver, not a whiner hoping someone else will solve your problems. EVE is not a padded corner game. It has lots of jagged edges and if you get cut, treat it as a learning experience and figure out yourself how not to get cut next time, don't whine exploit and beg for the corners to be filed down.

But here the objections aren't even legitimate. If I'm on a navy base and call Pizza hut to order a pizza asking if they can deliver to my base, if they accept my order and get stopped at the gate because their pass isn't valid. They owe ME money, not the other way around. I didn't scam them. If anything, THEY scammed me by accepting my order and wasting 45 minutes of my life while I waited for them to deliver.

Sure, sometimes people call and order pizza planning on beating up the pizza guy and stealing his money. But overall, it's not as common as you think.

Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
Posted - 2009.09.08 18:10:00 - [97]
 

Originally by: Khemul Zula
Do enlighten us on these 'flaws' in the design. And how docking rights is just the minor part.

It doesn't really work as an arguement just to say "There are flaws" without offering anything to back up the statement. Rolling Eyes


Offered a number of times. That you didn't read my forum post back whenever it was, isn't exactly my problem. But since you asked nicely ... Or as nice can be expected from Eve forums ...

Risk/reward is too far skewed in one direction. First, the Contractor has no risk at all, he puts up a large enough collateral and his risk is covered 100%. The Contractee bears all the risk. His ship, his pod, and the collateral.

To make the risk worth it, the rewards have to be much higher in the current system. Since cost to the contractor is very high, the marginal return on the cost is lower than the marginal return on doing it your self. That being the case, contracts are under utilized.

Suppose that, when you do a contract, there is no collateral at all. If the contractee fails to deliver, the shrink wrap is broken, the ship is destroyed, the contract expires, etc, then the shrink wrap package is magically poofed back the hangar of origin, or deliveries in the case of a corp issued contract.

Suddenly the cost to the Contractor decreases significantly because the risk to the contractee has been dramatically reduced. Now the contracts are worth using for often common trips, the marginal rate of return would fall low enough such that more contracts would be issued. More people would likely do them, certainly newer players in high sec and some adventurous ones in low sec, since the additional risk would be removed.

Of course the scammer and pirates hate this idea, though tend to not consider what more contracts with lower risk could actually do for them.

The part of this that deals with the docking issue/scam is that, if the cargo can't be delivered by the due date, it simply returns to the hangar of origin. If someone can't dock, then they can't dock. They've lost the time on the trip and the risk of the trip, but the scam bit is gone. Luring a target out there however remains - where the scammer now has to risk too, by shooting the lured victim, instead of the "lol noob, dumb ass, go back to wow" crap. It's easy to be brave behind a castle wall, idn't it?

MaxxOmega
Caldari
Temporal Mechanics
Posted - 2009.09.08 18:32:00 - [98]
 

Originally by: Iria Ahrens
Sure, sometimes people call and order pizza planning on beating up the pizza guy and stealing his money. But overall, it's not as common as you think.
In my neighborhood it is. We beat up the pizza guy nightly... Smile

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.09.08 20:32:00 - [99]
 


There are several ways to "fix" this:

* leave it alone and be more careful what contracts you accept -- zero effort on CCP's part, minimal effort on player's part, we still get threads like this complaining they have to engage a bit of brain and check stuff themselves

* have the system check if you have docking rights and re-warn you if you don't -- some effort on CCP's part, next to no effort on player's part, but you'd still have idiots who disable/ignore that warning too

* have the system check if you have docking rights and DENY ACCEPTANCE if you don't -- some effort on CCP's part, zero effort on player's part, we get different kinds of whines from people complaining they can't accept contracts

* make stations "openable containers", and make it possible to dump your cargo into that container -- more effort on CCP's part, no apparent problems with players... what you say, no problems ? let's rething this...
*** if that station-container is actually the same as your station-hangar, it opens up a whole new level of cans of worms (and "being able to resupply in enemy waters" being just the smallest problem)
*** if it's like a regular container but you can't get stuff out of it, you get the typical "I accidentally the whole package" (or "I accidentally the wrong station" or even "where's my ammo, dude?") so you still can't get away from the complaints
*** if it's JUST a regular container, you will start getting the "WTF, who stole my package" kind of complaints
...
ok, you could make it so that you can ONLY dump courier packages in, and you can ONLY dump the correct package inside (and contract is auto-completed when you do), but that's a truckload of extra coding... oh, and I bet somebody would STILL find some reason to complain about it anyway


...

Personally, I'd go with "option #1", that being "leave it alone and stop accepting stuff you don't know you can complete".

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2009.09.08 20:52:00 - [100]
 

Originally by: Adunh Slavy
The Contractee bears all the risk. His ship, his pod, and the collateral.
The contractee has zero risk unless he's an idiot.
Quote:
To make the risk worth it
…the contractee needs to ignore contracts that aren't.

So how is this a flaw in the design, and not the morons who accept contracts they cannot possibly fulfil?

Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
Posted - 2009.09.08 21:24:00 - [101]
 

Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Adunh Slavy
The Contractee bears all the risk. His ship, his pod, and the collateral.
The contractee has zero risk unless he's an idiot.
Quote:
To make the risk worth it
…the contractee needs to ignore contracts that aren't.

So how is this a flaw in the design, and not the morons who accept contracts they cannot possibly fulfil?


Read the post, comprehend it, you'll see the flaw I speak of is something other than your straw man.

OwlManAtt
Gallente
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2009.09.08 21:53:00 - [102]
 

The player owned stations are all conquerable, neh? If you don't have docking rights, just take control of the station.

I don't see a problem here?

Jimer Lins
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2009.09.08 22:29:00 - [103]
 

In a future world with technology as advanced as we supposedly have at our fingertips, I find it hard to believe that the computer system that disburses courier contracts is deliberately designed to provide you with job opportunities which are impossible for you to complete.

tl;dr- you shouldn't be able to see (or should be able to filter) contracts you cannot complete due to standings, etc.


Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2009.09.08 22:38:00 - [104]
 

Originally by: Adunh Slavy
Read the post, comprehend it, you'll see the flaw I speak of is something other than your straw man.
The only "flaw" to speak of is one that is completely unrelated to the topic at hand — that the courier might get ganked — and that risk will remain no matter what. It has nothing to do with the (supposed) scam or with contracts.

You say that there is no risk for the contractor. Well, no, because he's probably intelligent enough to make sure he won't lose anything if the courier is a klutz. The courier, in turn, will have to choose if the risk is worth the reward. Note the key part: he will have to choose. If the risk isn't worth the reward, then the courier would be an idiot to take the contract — that's his problem, not a flaw in the system.

And this is if we're talking about a normal contract. If it's a scam, then you're quite wrong about the risks involved. They stay exactly the same for the courier. Nothing changes. However, the risks are dramatically increased for the contractor: the risk is no longer the stuff (because it will be worthless), but rather that the nasty evil courier somehow manages to fulfil the contract, and the contractor loses a ton of money.

Thus: in a proper contract, the courier is in full control over the risk-vs-reward on his end, as is the contractor on his end; in a scam, the courier is still in full control, but the scammer/contractor is not.

The only real flaw here is that sometimes, couriers are stupid. That's a flaw in the person, not the system.

Iria Ahrens
Amarr
Ministry of War
Posted - 2009.09.08 23:23:00 - [105]
 

Edited by: Iria Ahrens on 08/09/2009 23:28:35

Originally by: Jimer Lins
In a future world with technology as advanced as we supposedly have at our fingertips, I find it hard to believe that the computer system that disburses courier contracts is deliberately designed to provide you with job opportunities which are impossible for you to complete.

tl;dr- you shouldn't be able to see (or should be able to filter) contracts you cannot complete due to standings, etc.




You're right. They can even make game AIs that can play themselves without your help. Why do you even want to play the game if you want the computer to do it all for you?

Quote:
And this is if we're talking about a normal contract. If it's a scam, then you're quite wrong about the risks involved. They stay exactly the same for the courier. Nothing changes. However, the risks are dramatically increased for the contractor: the risk is no longer the stuff (because it will be worthless), but rather that the nasty evil courier somehow manages to fulfil the contract, and the contractor loses a ton of money.



Exactly. If I accept a 30 million isk contract to move one civilian damage control to a POS and I have the access and take proper precautions, then I just made 30million.

Contractor takes the risk in scams if someone with access accepts. Contractor still has material risk even if not. Just because someone has collateral doesn't mean the goods move. Then he has to pay someone else to move the item and takes on the risk again.

Jimer Lins
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2009.09.09 00:13:00 - [106]
 

Originally by: Iria Ahrens
You're right. They can even make game AIs that can play themselves without your help. Why do you even want to play the game if you want the computer to do it all for you?



Ah, bite me, why dontcha? If you don't have enough imagination to scam without using user interface shortcomings, then GTFO. And spare me your silly justifications of how it should be easy or hard; it's totally irrelevant. Find a better/more imaginative scam and stop relying on poor UI design to give you "scam on easy mode".

Or just whine some more when people point out that there really are stupid shortcomings in the UI that should be addressed, and that the lack of decent data filters for contracts really should be addressed.

Ukucia
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.09.09 00:31:00 - [107]
 

Originally by: Dramaan
Only way to ccp to fix this is to enforce a special pass in courier contracts that alows you in but it shoud only work once if you
undock even if you not delivered you shod not be able dock agen that is only solution ccp can do if they which a solution
to fix it.
But i think it will stay as it is for now you can search what is name of station.

As mentioned above, this is a bad idea.

However, also mentioned in this very thread is another way to fix this. Some sort of "delivery tube" on the outside of the station. Fly within 500m, right-click package->Deliver. "Problem" solved. However, it's really not much of a problem.

Khemul Zula
Amarr
Keisen Trade League
Posted - 2009.09.09 00:51:00 - [108]
 

Originally by: Adunh Slavy
Originally by: Khemul Zula
Do enlighten us on these 'flaws' in the design. And how docking rights is just the minor part.

It doesn't really work as an arguement just to say "There are flaws" without offering anything to back up the statement. Rolling Eyes


Offered a number of times. That you didn't read my forum post back whenever it was, isn't exactly my problem. But since you asked nicely ... Or as nice can be expected from Eve forums ...

Risk/reward is too far skewed in one direction. First, the Contractor has no risk at all, he puts up a large enough collateral and his risk is covered 100%. The Contractee bears all the risk. His ship, his pod, and the collateral.

To make the risk worth it, the rewards have to be much higher in the current system. Since cost to the contractor is very high, the marginal return on the cost is lower than the marginal return on doing it your self. That being the case, contracts are under utilized.

Suppose that, when you do a contract, there is no collateral at all. If the contractee fails to deliver, the shrink wrap is broken, the ship is destroyed, the contract expires, etc, then the shrink wrap package is magically poofed back the hangar of origin, or deliveries in the case of a corp issued contract.

Suddenly the cost to the Contractor decreases significantly because the risk to the contractee has been dramatically reduced. Now the contracts are worth using for often common trips, the marginal rate of return would fall low enough such that more contracts would be issued. More people would likely do them, certainly newer players in high sec and some adventurous ones in low sec, since the additional risk would be removed.

Of course the scammer and pirates hate this idea, though tend to not consider what more contracts with lower risk could actually do for them.

The part of this that deals with the docking issue/scam is that, if the cargo can't be delivered by the due date, it simply returns to the hangar of origin. If someone can't dock, then they can't dock. They've lost the time on the trip and the risk of the trip, but the scam bit is gone. Luring a target out there however remains - where the scammer now has to risk too, by shooting the lured victim, instead of the "lol noob, dumb ass, go back to wow" crap. It's easy to be brave behind a castle wall, idn't it?

Seriously, stop this "scammer and pirates are part of a conspiracy" bull****.

You haven't described a flaw in the current system. You've described a different system that goes against the spirit of this game. Risk is an important part of this game.

First, courier rewards have nothing to do with risk/reward. They have nothing to do with collateral (well very little atleast, and it is a positive relationship). They have to do with how much it is worth to the person making the contract to have someone else deliver the item. This can not be changed by game mechanics, because it is not a game mechanic. If anything, collateral adds to the reward because the maker of the contract needs to attract people to the delivery. But either way, if it is not worth it to deduct more then 100k onto my profit margin then no amount of game mechanics will make me increase the delivery reward.

Second, the lack of courier contracts has nothing to do with risk/reward. It has to do with population density. With 1000s of possible pick-up and delivery points, the amount of combinations is just too big. It is a work/reward problem. It is not worth it for me to deduct more then 100k to get the package somewhere, it is also not worth it for someone to take 100k to go 7 jumps in the opposite direction they want to go just to deliver my package. I can get a delivery from Amarr -> Jita filled pretty quickly. A delivery from Teshi -> Amarr for the same reward, not filled. Basically, EVE needs to shrink drastically to fix courier contracts. Laughing

Michwich
Posted - 2009.09.09 01:12:00 - [109]
 

Originally by: Khemul Zula
... EVE needs to shrink drastically to fix courier contracts. Laughing


Or they could just make courier missions non exploitable. But why even take the side of the exploiters? Like really, common check yourself for a second, youre defnding liers thiefs and cheats. And thats being generouse, what they are doing is exploiting a broken game mechanic. No ones going to suffer if this gets fixed infact there will be rejoicing because a game mechanic might be worth something to game other than to scam. Seriousely how do you greifers and exploiters expect to survive without carebears? You snakes are eating your own tail and you really know deep down this game would survive without you. There is plenty of risk and PVP to be had in an exploit griefer free game. But I guess this is Eve's niche. Good luck CCP.

Khemul Zula
Amarr
Keisen Trade League
Posted - 2009.09.09 01:32:00 - [110]
 

Originally by: Michwich
Originally by: Khemul Zula
... EVE needs to shrink drastically to fix courier contracts. Laughing


Or they could just make courier missions non exploitable. But why even take the side of the exploiters? Like really, common check yourself for a second, youre defnding liers thiefs and cheats. And thats being generouse, what they are doing is exploiting a broken game mechanic. No ones going to suffer if this gets fixed infact there will be rejoicing because a game mechanic might be worth something to game other than to scam. Seriousely how do you greifers and exploiters expect to survive without carebears? You snakes are eating your own tail and you really know deep down this game would survive without you. There is plenty of risk and PVP to be had in an exploit griefer free game. But I guess this is Eve's niche. Good luck CCP.
Reading comprehension is a very good skill. Almost as good as reading itself. Laughing

Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
Posted - 2009.09.09 03:14:00 - [111]
 

Originally by: Khemul Zula

Seriously, stop this "scammer and pirates are part of a conspiracy" bull****.



I've never argued for or against the conspiracy BS of which you speak.

Originally by: Khemul Zula

You haven't described a flaw in the current system. You've described a different system that goes against the spirit of this game. Risk is an important part of this game.



Yes, I have. But you refuse to acknowledge it, not my problem.

Originally by: Khemul Zula

First ... Blah blah blah ... reward.



Obfuscated double talk.

Originally by: Khemul Zula

Second, the lack of courier contracts has nothing to do with risk/reward.



It has to do with marginal returns. But I suppose that is too delicate a flaw for you to perceive, again, not my problem.

Dramaan
Posted - 2009.09.09 03:33:00 - [112]
 

Originally by: Iria Ahrens
tdlr.

what i meant was is only way can think they can fix it.

And I did say is only to search who own the station,
and it will stay that way to did i not?

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2009.09.09 06:25:00 - [113]
 

Edited by: Tippia on 09/09/2009 06:26:02
Originally by: Michwich
But why even take the side of the exploiters? Like really, common check yourself for a second, youre defnding liers thiefs and cheats.
He's defending valid gameplay. Why do you want to ruin the game?
Quote:
what they are doing is exploiting a broken game mechanic.
Not really. They're exploiting stupid players. Said players, since they're stupid, will be exploited no matter what the system is. The "fix" here is for people not to be stupid, and that's not something the mechanic can fix.
Quote:
Seriousely how do you greifers and exploiters expect to survive without carebears?
Simple. The carebears aren't necessary for the game.

That said, griefers and exploiters get banned from EVE, so I don't see why you even bother addressing them.

Iria Ahrens
Amarr
Ministry of War
Posted - 2009.09.09 06:40:00 - [114]
 

Edited by: Iria Ahrens on 09/09/2009 06:43:08
Originally by: Jimer Lins
Originally by: Iria Ahrens
You're right. They can even make game AIs that can play themselves without your help. Why do you even want to play the game if you want the computer to do it all for you?



Ah, bite me, why dontcha? If you don't have enough imagination to scam without using user interface shortcomings, then GTFO. And spare me your silly justifications of how it should be easy or hard; it's totally irrelevant. Find a better/more imaginative scam and stop relying on poor UI design to give you "scam on easy mode".

Or just whine some more when people point out that there really are stupid shortcomings in the UI that should be addressed, and that the lack of decent data filters for contracts really should be addressed.



Quit crying scam. Quit blaming the interface. Quit blaming others for your own shortcommings.

My justifications have nothing to do with easy or hard. It's about possible or not possible. If I put up a contract to retrieve something under one mile of water in the middle of the ocean, don't accept the contract if you can't deliver. How hard is that to understand?

And if you try to run a contract and get blown up, don't assume it was a scam. 0.0 is inherently dangerous. If the contract creator isn't on your killmail, you've no reason to cry scam.

Michwich
Posted - 2009.09.09 07:24:00 - [115]
 

Edited by: Michwich on 09/09/2009 07:25:29
Edited by: Michwich on 09/09/2009 07:25:04
Originally by: Iria Ahrens
Edited by: Iria Ahrens on 09/09/2009 06:43:08
Originally by: Jimer Lins
Originally by: Iria Ahrens
You're right. They can even make game AIs that can play themselves without your help. Why do you even want to play the game if you want the computer to do it all for you?



Ah, bite me, why dontcha? If you don't have enough imagination to scam without using user interface shortcomings, then GTFO. And spare me your silly justifications of how it should be easy or hard; it's totally irrelevant. Find a better/more imaginative scam and stop relying on poor UI design to give you "scam on easy mode".

Or just whine some more when people point out that there really are stupid shortcomings in the UI that should be addressed, and that the lack of decent data filters for contracts really should be addressed.



Quit crying scam. Quit blaming the interface. Quit blaming others for your own shortcommings.

My justifications have nothing to do with easy or hard. It's about possible or not possible. If I put up a contract to retrieve something under one mile of water in the middle of the ocean, don't accept the contract if you can't deliver. How hard is that to understand?

And if you try to run a contract and get blown up, don't assume it was a scam. 0.0 is inherently dangerous. If the contract creator isn't on your killmail, you've no reason to cry scam.



Scam or no scam this is too easy, you want to make a bogus contract to nowhere to ripp someone off then get your ass in a ship and intercept them. Having an I win button when someone accepts a contract that cant be completed with no effort on your part is not PVP.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2009.09.09 07:40:00 - [116]
 

Originally by: Michwich
Scam or no scam this is too easy, you want to make a bogus contract to nowhere to ripp someone off then get your ass in a ship and intercept them.
So what? It's also insanely easy to avoid.
Quote:
Having an I win button when someone accepts a contract that cant be completed with no effort on your part is not PVP.
It's not so much about having an "I win" button, as the stupid courier willingly pressing a big "I lose" button. Wink

Solution to the problem: don't press it.

Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
Posted - 2009.09.09 08:07:00 - [117]
 

Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Michwich
Scam or no scam this is too easy, you want to make a bogus contract to nowhere to ripp someone off then get your ass in a ship and intercept them.
So what? It's also insanely easy to avoid.
Quote:
Having an I win button when someone accepts a contract that cant be completed with no effort on your part is not PVP.
It's not so much about having an "I win" button, as the stupid courier willingly pressing a big "I lose" button. Wink

Solution to the problem: don't press it.


This illustrates the problem with buttons, stupid people and people warning about not to push them.

ElrondMD
Macabre Votum
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2009.09.09 08:20:00 - [118]
 

Players can allow you to dock in their outposts, your inability to get said permissions is a failing on your part as a courier accepting the contract.

Social networking is a key part of this game, simply because you lack the ability to gain access to stations does not mean you are being exploited, you just accepted a contract you could not meet due to your own inabilities.

Lubomir Penev
Dark Nexxus
S I L E N T.
Posted - 2009.09.09 08:56:00 - [119]
 

Edited by: Lubomir Penev on 09/09/2009 09:04:21
Edited by: Lubomir Penev on 09/09/2009 08:58:13
Originally by: Jimer Lins
In a future world with technology as advanced as we supposedly have at our fingertips, I find it hard to believe that the computer system that disburses courier contracts is deliberately designed to provide you with job opportunities which are impossible for you to complete.

tl;dr- you shouldn't be able to see (or should be able to filter) contracts you cannot complete due to standings, etc.



You know you can always complete them by subcontracting right?

Also this wouldn't help an outpost could be conquered between you accepting the contract and your delivery attempt.

One thing that would help is a warning saying "Item is to be delivered/picked at a player outposts, you may not have docking right at time of delivery/pick up". Corp standings are private you'd only have to create contracts and try to accept them to reverse engineer standings if filtering by standing was implemented, not acceptable.

Originally by: Ukucia

However, also mentioned in this very thread is another way to fix this. Some sort of "delivery tube" on the outside of the station. Fly within 500m, right-click package->Deliver. "Problem" solved. However, it's really not much of a problem.


This kinda remove the point of conquering outposts if people entrenched inside can be resupplied from the outside.

Iria Ahrens
Amarr
Ministry of War
Posted - 2009.09.09 18:11:00 - [120]
 

Originally by: Michwich

Scam or no scam this is too easy, you want to make a bogus contract to nowhere to ripp someone off then get your ass in a ship and intercept them. Having an I win button when someone accepts a contract that cant be completed with no effort on your part is not PVP.


A courier contract is never a bogus contract. And the responsibility is no different than RL.

Just as RL, nothing is stopping people from accepting contracts they cannot meet, but then the owner of the contract can sue for breach of contract and penalize the courier. Likewise, the courier is guaranteed payment by law of the contract is filled.

When a contract is made in EVE, SOMEONE can fill the contract, ergo, IT IS VALID. The only kind of scam contract is the kind where they lie in wait for you somewhere en-route. And running those can be worth it if you know what you are doing.


Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only