Scope of Problem:
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 doesn’t 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 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 “bookmark” within the system in question. Warping to the bookmark will take you to a site that contains all your items locked away in “containers” 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 can’t 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.
Cool, good to know that everything I’ve built up in EVE has the chance to just disappear in 24 hours.
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.
Pretty sure this sums up your post:
- You want the loot, but don’t 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 doesn’t 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, you’ll be killing structures for their strategic value - not their material value.
I’m normally very open to ideas, but this smacks of someone who operates out of an asset safety system and wants easier access to peoples stuff.
You gotta work on being a pirate. If you wanted to be a welfare queen, this is the wrong game.
So basically if you quit the game for more than a few months, guess your stuff is gone. Oh, and even if you don’t you still have to manually freight it out because apparently jumping your jump freighter into what is now probably hostile territory isn’t 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. I’ll 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.
Sure. EVE is supposed to be a cold, dark space and asset safety at all sucks.
However, if you did that, then I’d hope they turn around themselves and shoot your stuff after moving theirs.
Also, you don’t need docking rights to move stuff using asset safety. They’ll have 14 days to safety their stuff.
That just makes you look really risk averse not gonna lie.
Not sure i agree, perhaps 50% chance of losing gear or some ■■■■ but yeh defo an idea i could get behind.
I mean its better than ‘‘oh you dont want to lose stuff or protect your space, heres more bubble wrap’’
Current one being an idea circulating that you wont be able to bump people of tether… which tbh is impossible to do if their not afk or have half a brain…
Tether should be a fueled module too imo.
Asset safety is another feature that makes nullsec far safer than it should be.
On the other hand, if it’s your only citadel, nullsec might stop you ragequitting. For this reason, I’d 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 it’s 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.
All these useless words when all that needs to be said is:
Remove Asset Safety
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 don’t need it no one does. the argument was that no one would use markets if they didn’t exist. Well Null sec stations don’t exist anymore and if no one uses them for empire markets then not that big of a loss.
IT’S TIME TO REMOVE SECUITY FROM NULL SECURITY
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.