From the point of Asset Safety is a necessary function to provided a exit/enter point into playing to game when inhabiting non-NPC space(Wormholes excluded). Without a way to keep a persons asset safe people would be penalized for logging off the game(imagine someone cancelling a two week vacation just because they would risk loosing a their stuff).
But from the point of view of an attacker it is a killjoy. Without the possibility of loot it hard to get people motivated to perform such a long task as shooting down a citadel(all the longer if the citadel owner doesnāt to defend it). This is the point that causes most people to demand asset safety should removed. But that would bring up back to problem off offline punishment.
My idea purposes to to add some reward to attacking citadels, while still having some protection of assets when away.
My Idea:
My solution this this problem is for asset safety to work as it is now except that instead the items being transported to the new location automatically the pilot will have to transport the items(or rather a facsimile of the item) to the required station. Note the is still no choice in where the items will have to be delivered to.
Under this system when you have paid your asset safety fee to concord, you will get a warp-able ābookmarkā within the system in question. Warping to the bookmark will take you to a site that contains all your items locked away in ācontainersā that you can retrieve. The site is initially undetectable on d-scan or probes. Once the first item is taken from the cache a beacon will be lit that can be probed down. I should note that this site and bookmark will expire after 24 hours causing a loss of all items remaining in the site.
The containers are very tardis-like in that they take up fractionally less space than the item they contain. They also inhibit the jump drives of any ship. You can view the item inside the container be canāt use or remove the item from the container. To get the items out you have to dock up it the proscribed station or citadel, once you dock up the containers are automatically removed and the items they contain are place in the station hangar.
If a container is transferred to another player (voluntarily or otherwise) a new destination is calculated based on the players access and the origin of the container.
One other possible change of top of this idea, would be have asset safety expire after two months to a year.
You need to read more carefully. The timeout occurs only after you pay your fee. Prior to that your assets are safe in asset safety limbo, same as the current system.
You want the loot, but donāt want to shoot an annoying structures if no loot
You assume that the person invested if not unable to defend, wants their stuff to disappear.
Conumdum: 2 Parties, one wants things but other doesnāt want to lose it.
???
PROFIT!!! HTFU and just shoot the thing. There is no guarantee you are going to get good drops. There is no guarantee the person using the structure will always be using it if you deny it (aka taking it from them). Costs a fortune to use the safety asset option. Costs a fortune to just build a structure and set it up in the first place.
tl;dr - This is EVE. Costs = risk/choice = benefits/Loss of both parties.
Without asset safety there is effectively no chance of establishing a market in sovereign Nullsec. Major market hubs have trillions in assets belonging to hundreds, possibly thousands of players. For the foreseeable future, youāll be killing structures for their strategic value - not their material value.
So basically if you quit the game for more than a few months, guess your stuff is gone. Oh, and even if you donāt you still have to manually freight it out because apparently jumping your jump freighter into what is now probably hostile territory isnāt risky enough.
Should just remove asset safety from low power structures.
As soon as a structure goes low power, Upwell should notify anyone with something in it that the safety feature will expire in 14 days, giving people time to remove their stuff if they want. After that, no asset safety until the structure is brought back online.
Awesome. Iāll set up a citadel, invite people to have corp offices and stuff in it, then pull their docking access, kill the power, and wait 14 days to collect my loot.
Not sure i agree, perhaps 50% chance of losing gear or some ā ā ā ā but yeh defo an idea i could get behind.
I mean its better than āāoh you dont want to lose stuff or protect your space, heres more bubble wrapāā
Current one being an idea circulating that you wont be able to bump people of tetherā¦ which tbh is impossible to do if their not afk or have half a brainā¦
Asset safety is another feature that makes nullsec far safer than it should be.
On the other hand, if itās your only citadel, nullsec might stop you ragequitting. For this reason, Iād recommend CCP keep it but at a much higher premium eg
75% in nullsec.
40% in lowsec.
10% in highsec.
The problem is W-space. Its rewards are around 80% of nullsec but itās at least 3x more dangerous. The latter figure will fall with opt-in local but the disparity will probably remain huge.
CCP could just give W-space asset safety or nerf nullsec rewards.
I honestly feel that Asset Safety as an expensive structure service and/or I-Hub upgrade better accomplishes this balance of safety and motivation to shoot structures, and with far less complexity.
nah I just say remove it. WHs donāt need it no one does. the argument was that no one would use markets if they didnāt exist. Well Null sec stations donāt exist anymore and if no one uses them for empire markets then not that big of a loss.