agree. the fee needs to be less. Or go down over time. As non logical that would be in rl it should be here to encourage people to play again
Edit: You have to wait 5 days after something happens to your structure
you have 15 days to move your assets to another location in the same system… however
If the station the assets are being automatically moved to is not within the same system, the player will have to pay 15% of the assets’ value to release them from asset safety. If it is the same system, the charge would be 0.5% of the assets’ value.
So you should still have to pay IMO if the system has to move your ■■■■ for you. So for those saying the fees are too high (even csm said it) what would you propose should be how the fee is calculated.
especially since from null it goes to the closest npc station in lowsec.
I’d think that the player would choose the trigger. Maybe a series of… If X then. An obvious first ‘if then’ would be the initiator of the mothball protocol. I’m thinking length of time since last login. Then followed by a series of other “if then” If away from eve for longer than X then start the mothball protocol. If assets are in a player structure then… if player structure is in X security status then… If structure is owned by the player then… If x then x.
The game would follow the settings that the player set with their “if X then X” choices.
If hauling then haul to X
If hauling then set collateral to 1.25 of asset value
if hauling then assign contract to X corp, X person, X alliance, or X whatever is set
If hauling contract can’t be funded from wallet then X
If X then X
The game already tells us what the value of every item is though it is weighted by the market orders so with a little trickery one could adjust those values.
As I said. My intent is to put MORE choice and responsibility into the players hands. I realize that the player chooses by not choosing. This does not empower the player with a sense of agency though.
One doesn’t ever have to put insurance on any of their ships. One can put more or less insurance on their ships. There is choice and agency and that causes the player to feel more involved. This then affects the player such that when their ship gets popped and they get or don’t get a payout it feels earned.
That is what I’m chasing. That sense of owning the consequence of your actions by increasing the autonomy of the player with what happens and how. To cut out all the “I didn’t choose where my stuff was sent” “I would have preferred to have my stuff sent to the corp in a possible corp run asset retrieval program” “i would have preferred that my stuff got sold so that I had the ability to buy new stuff at X and not have to buy it only to sell it” “Why don’t they let me…” There are a lot of this kind of crap.
EVE is a sandbox and a system that is essentially an on/off switch does not fit with what EVE is. I believe that EVE does need some kind of asset protection system but I also feel like individuals that just don’t do what they need to do deserve what happens. Whatever the system individuals that are stupid will still be stupid. That said a smart person who setts up things right and keeps them set up would do well in those situations where life pulls them away and keeps them away cause other things are more a priority. There would be more sense of owning ones mess ups. There would be better retention of returning players because of less sense of alienation immediately upon return.
Volume and jump distance just like how it is now with contracts. If the ISK per jump isn’t enough no one is gonna haul your stuff. That though still leaves a sense of frustration cause of not being able to choose this or that. The price isn’t really the issue. It’s the point that people jump on but the real issue is the sense of frustration that comes out from a system that just acts and leaves the player with no choices.
When I along with 2 RL friends were in null, we had stuff stored in a upwell structure.
one RL friend stayed in the game while me and the other friend had to step away… We were not clued in that the structure was unanchored and moved and we were given no notice from our friend about that. considering it was in null, it was moved to the nearest npc station in lowsec.
we each had to pay a few bil isk to get our stuff out, but thats the price of the system moving the stuff.
isn’t it the players that control those prices of how far jumps etc.
So you want CCP to change their algorithm and say, ooh lets charge what the players are charging to move their stuff.
which for my example 3we-ky is 9 jumps from Hophib. PushX will not haul from 3wk under a normal contract… hophib to where i’m sitting is over 70 jumps. hauling from hophib to where i’m at with what I have in my station would cost 128 mil, not counting collateral.
Or you think CCP should change so its 15% of the volume in ones structure instead of its value?
where as its .5% if it can be moved to the same system (unless you are null you’re sol.)
better option is to just memorize yourself with how asset safety works, and if you have to log out immediately, don’t wait longer than 20 days to log back in and move your stuff before the system does it for you.
1 Like
If a player rage-quits or just leaves the game without logging in for months or years I don’t see why they should be extended the courtesy of having ‘choice’. Did CCP get a choice whether the players leave? No.
Choice should belong to current players, not people who have indefinitely left the game and/or may never return.
I’ll go even further: In my opinion, the assets of a player that hasn’t logged in for more than two years should be forfeited, reprocessed and poured back into the economy via the Market and his isk should be seized.
3 Likes
contracted to me
3 Likes
Not precisely true.
1 Like
Players have all the agency.
If you want your assets to be safe at a certain station instead of your current structure you can create a hauling contract or haul it yourself.
What you are doing is relying on an automated last resort system to get your items to safety. And then you complain that you don’t have a choice in where it ends up or that you have to pay a fee. 
It’s like complaining that your ship on autopilot takes too long to reach any destination and that you frequently get killed at gates. And that the automated system should be improved so that it is a competitive choice compared to your other options that rely on player actions.
Stop relying on the automated systems and take the responsibility and choice in to your own hands -if you want more options and choice- by making sure your items are in a secure location of your own choosing when you take a break.
Or stop complaining about the fact that the game after your choice of leaving your items vulnerable took the liberty of automatically saving it all for you at a small fee.
8 Likes
I know of other MMOs that have an alpha/omega setup, where if you don’t pay your omega type subscription or log in for a specific length of time your account gets deleted. It doesn’t even get reverted to alpha status. So what you suggest is not without precedent.
1 Like
Good to know. So it’s not so extreme for CCP to do the same.
Knowing that, it’s mind-boggling the level of entitlement some players have. CCP is gracious enough to come up with Asset Safety idea and some still b!tch… unbelievable.
3 Likes
I totally agree with that title. I think asset saftey should just go away completely.
While it sounds like a reasonable idea superficially, this would have very negative consequences. It greatly penalizes people robbing ESS’s on the edges of New Eden, which would make those locations even more safe for crabbing and hoarding wealth.
Abuse of the asset safety system by transporting items to low sec using enemy structures is the first thing that should be fixed about asset safety.
“Abuse” is just, like, your opinion man. I have no problem with addressing the “transport items using enemy structures and asset safety mechanic” so long as the point I raised above is also addressed, which is completely ignored in your response.
Using it for ESS robbing has has a real ISK cost – you’re earning 59.5% of an ESS main bank instead of 70% – and a real time cost of 20 days. There’s still the lowsec risk of moving the bonds from a publicly known asset safety station to a publicly known bond-buying station. Plus you can’t pick which lowsec system asset safety uses, so it could still be to a very hostile and dangerous lowsec pocket anyway where the same neuts/reds project their capital/blops umbrella.
Regardless, if that mechanic is patched out, I also would like to see a corresponding normalizing change with it: for example, all normal bounties are also paid in encrypted bonds and must be sold to Concord stations.
In theory you can pick which losec station it goes to. Assets goes to the closest losec system with an npc station. And its not 20 days if you manually trigger asset safety, its 5 days, and you can choose a structure to move them in the same system.
You’re accurately describing the mechanic in general. Regurgitating the game manual does not constitute an argument about how it will affect gameplay such as ESS robbing, and the corresponding risks/rewards to crabbing in nullsec. That was the thrust of my original argument: changing asset safety mechanics to be per-jump costs makes the edges of the universe disincentivized for certain approaches to ESS robbing which may make it more safe for quiet crabbing. Ignoring the analytical effects of a mechanic to just re-state the “in theory” mechanics isn’t really contributing to the discussion at hand.
Additionally, “in theory” and “in practice” are very different as executed in gameplay. Please go actually rob nullsec ESSes and elaborate what led you to choose robbing an area where you have a friendly and enemy station anchored in-system for the 5-day “benefit” of dropping off the bonds in the enemy station instead of the friendly one (lol?), or an area of nullsec where the 20-day lowsec station is in a hellcamped dangerous hellhole, or an area of nullsec where the 20-day lowsec station is in a calm quiet backwater area, or if you chose to filament in/out of areas and gamble landing in soft parts of sov null, or if you chose to slowboat/gate-hop a bunch of encrypted bonds out in a pinata cargo bay. Or if you chose to rob one region that would be a 20-day lowsec hell station, but instead travel all the way to a different region to do 20-day asset safety to a corresponding quiet lowsec station. (Edit: here’s the list to get planning)
EDIT: To set the record straight, it is 5-days only for same-system delivery. Out-of-system delivery is always 20 days. Regardless of manual or automatic triggering. The only choices made are: if same-system delivery, which station/structure in system; if out-of-system delivery, the “choice” is made for you depending on the location of the originating station (and the originating station can “theoretically” be chosen in the case of manual triggers, or planned for in the case of any kind of trigger).
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.