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

Khemul Zula
Amarr
Keisen Trade League
Posted - 2009.09.10 04:24:00 - [151]
 

Edited by: Khemul Zula on 10/09/2009 04:26:54
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Jimer Lins
Why is it hard to understand that people should be able to filter contracts by whether or not they can dock in the target system?

They CAN.

There's already a big red glowing in the dark pulsating eyes scary ultra super mega warning telling you (paraphrasing here):
"hey, moron, the destination is a player owned station, are you REALLY that stupid to take this contract if you have no idea if you can dock there or not ? oh, and don't ask ME if YOU have the rights to dock there, it's not my freaking problem, make your own calls and sort it out, dammit"...

...or, you know, something to that extent.
It might be just a couple of small reddish words displayed briefly at one point, but the general sentiment is there.

Erm...as far as I can see there isn't.

There is the name of the station on the contract form, which should be rather obvious most of the time when player owned (one of the stations even had 'no docking rights' in it's name).
There is the "Your ship can't handle this cargo" warning if you don't have the right ship active.
Then there is the "Here are the details, are you sure?" screen.

Unless it can be turned off. With the amount of contracts I've done I've probably turned off half, if not all, the warning messages that can be turned off. Laughing


But anyways. Assuming it isn't a massive load on the server to check universal docking rights everytime a contract is looked at, and assuming it doesn't need a whole new query system programmed into the game. It'd still require programming and changes to the contract system. While the feature could be added, I'm sure it'd be extremely low priority.
Especially considering that it is just minor enough to cause a threadnought along the lines of "Why is CCP wasting it's time with this bull**** while <insert other issue here> goes unfixed!". Laughing

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2009.09.10 05:20:00 - [152]
 

Originally by: Jimer Lins
Just get off the "I want to scam on easy mode by exploiting stupid UI design" kick.
Where's the exploit? How do you know it's a scam?

Iria Ahrens
Amarr
Ministry of War
Posted - 2009.09.10 05:22:00 - [153]
 

Originally by: Adunh Slavy
Originally by: Iria Ahrens

stuff


Why is it that you so vehemently defend this? Don't give me the cause people are stupid crap, or cause it's a legitimate game function, or it's not an exploit fan fare. Why do you defend it? What benefit do you gain by the way it is?


I like the way it is. I see nothing wrong with a system that imposes a learning curve. I've done a lot of stupid things in this game, and I'll do even more stupid things. But I learn from the experience and become a stronger player for it, I don't cry for a change in game mechanics.

Iria Ahrens
Amarr
Ministry of War
Posted - 2009.09.10 05:36:00 - [154]
 

Edited by: Iria Ahrens on 10/09/2009 05:40:47

Originally by: Jimer Lins
Originally by: Iria Ahrens

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



Blow it out your sphincter; I don't care who or what you scam. Go for it, I love scammers. Just get off the "I want to scam on easy mode by exploiting stupid UI design" kick.


Quit with the baseless accusations. My contracts are a matter of public record. All contracts are a matter of public record. Look at the completion rate for contracts by the issuer if you truly suspect a scam.
Quote:

Why is it hard to understand that people should be able to filter contracts by whether or not they can dock in the target system? This isn't rocket science; the data's all there and I could write a query that would get it now, let alone with whatever technology is available twenty-some thousand years in the future.




I'm against hand holding. Someone up thread said it better than I. EVE is a game of risk management. It is the players job to manage risk, not the interface.

I would accept a separate method of querying a POS to verify docking rights. If you're in the same alliance. If you're not in the alliance, then you should assume you do NOT have docking rights. If you want to check anyway. Get in a fast ship and go visit before accepting the contract.

Being able to query allinace POSes would be nice when I'm trying to hide from a bunch of reds in system. Bouncing off shields when overwhelming force is in system is a bit scary.

Jimer Lins
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2009.09.10 06:14:00 - [155]
 

Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Jimer Lins
Just get off the "I want to scam on easy mode by exploiting stupid UI design" kick.
Where's the exploit? How do you know it's a scam?


I used "exploit" in the standard sense of "to use or take advantage of", not in the MMO sense of "to use a defect in the game or related systems to unintended advantage". And as to whether it's a scam, there really isn't any way to be sure, which also goes against both good UI design and EVE philosophy- the latter being that you can fleece the stupid by lying to them, but it's not cricket to simply let the system's design do the lying (even if it's only by omission) for you.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.09.10 06:47:00 - [156]
 

Originally by: Akita T

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 - 2009.09.10 07:31:00 - [157]
 

Originally by: Jimer Lins
I used "exploit" in the standard sense of "to use or take advantage of", not in the MMO sense of "to use a defect in the game or related systems to unintended advantage".
So where's the defect?
Quote:
And as to whether it's a scam, there really isn't any way to be sure, which also goes against both good UI design and EVE philosophy- the latter being that you can fleece the stupid by lying to them, but it's not cricket to simply let the system's design do the lying (even if it's only by omission) for you.
But it doesn't omit anything. It is easy to spot the "scam". It is very much in keeping with the EVE philosophy: make use of the information available and make informed decisions, or you'll robbed blind.

Khemul Zula
Amarr
Keisen Trade League
Posted - 2009.09.10 14:00:00 - [158]
 

Originally by: Jimer Lins
And as to whether it's a scam, there really isn't any way to be sure, which also goes against both good UI design and EVE philosophy- the latter being that you can fleece the stupid by lying to them, but it's not cricket to simply let the system's design do the lying (even if it's only by omission) for you.

Do you understand exactly what the scam is? The UI can't show you whether it is a scam because the scam isn't in the contract itself but in the motivation behind the scam. Whether it is 100 skillbooks or 1 tritanium, you still get payed for delivery. You still get your collateral back. Delivery is still (theoretically) possible. The only difference is that the 1 tritanium package is not expected to be completed. The person is gambling on the fact that you can't deliver it but if you can then it works just like any other contract. Hell, if you can't it works just like any other contract.

Actually the main area where the UI fails is in the other direction, because once you've accepted the contract you can actually look into a courier package and see exactly what you are delivering. This is why collateral amounts rarely go below item value, even in low-risk delivery areas.


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