Courier contract, small rework


(Cooper Kring) #1

Hello EVE community o/

I’m Cooper Kring, pilot of Red Frog and happy hauler of New Eden! As you may know, to run courier contract, we contract the courier package to an alt, the package get transported to the destination and contracted back for delivery.

I’m coming here to propose two smalls tweaks of the courier contract system (and a proposition concerning citadel docking rights).

(1) The most important point of this thread. Being able to deliver the contract with any character that got the package at the right station would be an awesome improvement for all hauler. Of course, the collateral and reward would still go to the character that accept the contract in the first place. :santa:

(2) Being able to create contract with container. I’m talking about ships with ammo in it or fleet hangar. That one is a lot less annoying that the first (1) proposition but would still be a life improvement for hauler. Few thing are more annoying that accepting a courier contract to realize that you cannot contract it to your hauler alt.

(?) Citadel related. That would be great if we could deliver the package from tether range whiteout the need of docking right. We have to avoid lot of structure contract to avoid scam and it could be painful to the citadel owner.

I would be happy to hear your thought on that, now, back to hauling o/

Cooper Kring, Red Frog member.


(Dyver Phycad) #2

I agree with all the points. However, number ? is not going to happen any time soon. You must be able to scam someone with structures because of risk vs. reward (not my words, just common scammer parlance) and CCP introduced structures in high sec with regards to courier contracts specifically to enable the same null sec mechanics of courier contract access denial traps. It would be nice if they did something about it but completely removing the potential to scam someone out of the collateral is very unlikely to happen, even though Fozzie said multiple times they would do something about it.

Since this is the case (but I will happily be proven wrong in this regard) more robsust filter options for couriers for citadels are necessary as intermediate solution.


(Cooper Kring) #4

Yeah, I agree with your comment on the number ?. This is the EVE way, just wanted to see what people think about it.

Well, now I hope that the first two point are taken in consideration. I wonder the reason why we cannot contract container. My guess is that it’s either a problem with the way the client handle contract or to avoid something else. Need some light :smiley:


(Whitehound) #5
  1. Yes. I see no harm in it. A package is only an item and if it helps Red Frog to help players then by all means.

  2. No. I understand it would be good to have, but the suggestion primarily serves Red Frog to dodge other mechanics such as war decs. It would be better to look for a completely different solution where pilots don’t have to use alts in the first place instead of patching one part of the game after dodging another part.

  3. Also no. A change in how structures work would also be better than this. I would rather see structures to remain open for a fixed time after being open to the public and for these first to require a transition period to ensure that not only courier contracts, but all other contracts as well as manufacture and research jobs can be concluded before a structure finally closes.

Just my thoughts.


(Cooper Kring) #6

I couldn’t agree more with 1 and 2.

  1. I think structure scam as something wanted by the community. As EVE is more about risk vs reward, you can get more in structure so there is more risk. Not really my opinion but that was the feedback I had when I proposed the idea. I can understand.

(Whitehound) #7

Well, then this means you are against 3), because why should one be allowed to work around scams? In this case could it be used for a new type of scam, where the item is being delivered, but the owner of the content can no longer access the station. Red Frog would become a participant in the scam.

I’m not against scams, these are unavoidable in complex environments, but it does not need extra support by CCP and I honestly don’t know why the majority of EVE players would want this. Stuff gets locked down in stations all the time for other reasons. We don’t need to give players a new mechanic, which allows them to do so at the press of a button. There needs to be a little bit more than this. A close-down period seems just fine. If someone doesn’t pick up their stuff after the time has run out will it still get locked in and provide enough grief. EVE doesn’t need to scoop to levels where players can grief each other with super dull open-close-open-close-…-scams. No, really, such low levels of fun just makes me avoid structures altogether.


(Cooper Kring) #8

You’re right, I just hope other people agree to it ^^


(Jim Plaude) #9

:ok_hand: With this, hauler corps could skip internal re-contracting and all the follow-up clicks (where collateral/reward/permissions are not an issue, like with alts or trusted pilots)—imo a huge improvement, and it makes sense. This solution would lack compensation for the hauler though, so unless other arrangements are made, it will work best with alts or very tight corps.

At the moment, re-contracting to haulers is essential for certain hauler corps as a way to provide content and it should be unlimited with regards to containers, at least within corp. However, I’d prefer for contracts to get flagged automatically (with a message similar to the docking rights warning) if such a container is included, which would also eliminate the problem, provided the contractor notices the warning in the first place.

The undocking experience, particularly outside of Highsec, can be quite interesting on its own. While I like the sheer comfort of the idea, I believe it would take something away from the profession—in this case perhaps a few hundred thousand ISK/jump :wink:


(JUSTIFIED ARROGANCE) #10

Normally i think scamming is the best part of EVE, but in the case of citadel delivery scamming it is hurting the development of the citadel concept too much. I would rather see more people putting up citadels knowing that people would deliver to their citadel vs the benefits of citadel contract scamming.


(Cooper Meghezi) #11

The workaround is to negociate with PushX and Red Frog to get on the green list but both solutions are ok with me. I wouldn’t know home much it’s hurting citadel


(system) #12

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.