If you value your ISK
Beware of the risk!
2 Likes
I think the real guaranty is to compare the value of the goods being transported to the collateral requirement. A large discrepancy represents a risk for the hauler.
The function that allow players to remove docking permission is good for a lot of points. Per example, not allowing enemies to dock inside station while on war.
So yes it’s normal that they will warn about it on the contract. What I’m saying is these functions are getting exploit to scam people. Two clicks by accident and your money is doom without being able to do something about it. It’s lame.
I will copy/past my message from my topic from another part of the forum.
"Hello everyone,
I don’t know if it will change something for the devs but I will say my suggestion anyway.
Today I did lose 2.7b. For a lot 2.7b is nothing but for me it was way a lot. Why did I lose it? Transport contracts scamming. There is no security with contracts. IRL a contract is something you have to respect cause otherwise you can have serious problem but in Eve Online contracts are a joke. Delivery contracts need more garanty.
Someone can just put a huge collateral and if you accept it he can just disable the docking permission at his structure and retire the core. That will make the hauler unable to complete the contract even by the direct personal hangar deposit. Talking about that, how useless this great fonction is at this point.
Call it like you want but I will say it like it is : it’s a exploit. A natural exploit. Natural, cause there is no way in game that allow the player to complete a delivery contract in this kind of situation cause there is no way in game that is developed yet for these kind of situations.
Why can delivery contract can’t deposit anyway into structures via the direct delivery personal hangar ? It would be just better ? No ? Or making the hauler able anyway to dock when having active contract with a certain structure ? Why CCP just allow that kind of exploit ?
I really find it discusting to have lose my money like this. My money that I get by skills extractors. All this waste of time. Real time and a lot of time.
Anyway. I hope it will be fix soon. For myself, I don’t really know if I will continue. Thank you for your time and cya around… Maybe."
We should be able to invalid the contract and having collateral back by returning at the collect station to deposit the package where we took it.
Or maybe making a delivery contract should give the hauler a permit to anyway depose package at the direct personal hangar?
Or just being able to see the merchandises inside the contract before accepting it? But this one doesn’t cover clicks accident.
It’s really lame to not be able to do something if we just accept the contract. It could have been accept by accident but then there is no chance to not lose our money if so. Contracts need to be more realistic in matter of garanty and less a big exploit to the ones that have structures.
Just get better at the game and dont whine when another player beats you.
2 Likes
You again, polite and constructive like always… No wonder why people was saying in game that the forum was a bad place to write on. People like you definitely make it toxic.
Can you be kind for the only one time of your life and let the adults talk? Get lost please.
It was a known exploit. CCP fixed it by making it possible to deliver at structures even if you have no docking right at them.
But then they added cores, which re-introduced this scam.
While scams are allowed in the game, I do think it’s inconsistent to have a delivery option exist but still allow players to exploit this scam.
The solution to me is simple: remove the delivery option. It makes no sense to have a fix for a scam that isn’t a fix, yet introduces more issues such as that players can get loot to safety delivering goods to hostile structures and using asset safety to get it out of null sec.
Keep the scams, remove the delivery option.
As for the haulers: try to do more research on the owner of a contract if you decide to deliver to a player-owned structure.
3 Likes
Merged posts with the same topic that were posted in two different forum categories.
I don’t know about removing it. It can be simply dev correctly and everything will be ok. Well I gave some ideas previously in this topic ! ^^
I did use the same topic title but the rest was only a citation under ‘’ ‘’ cause it was explaining the problem. Didnt you see? I even said it was a copy/past. I did add things at it after tho. If the title was the problem why didnt you just told me ? I would have change it ! ^^
The public on this forum part isnt the same as in the council one and both part doesnt have the same utility. There was no use to merge both topic seriously.
Arg I will just give up. Thank all for the good time specially on the mining channel. It was for sure fun in this channel, people was agreable and kind. Toxic forum and all the rest like exploits made it a bad game experience. I hope it will change but well this is what happen when we try to. No wonder why people are saying this game is dying. Anyway, cya maybe around in a long few, when I will want badly play this kind of games cause in final I love this kind of games. For the moment I think, just not Eve Online.
I happen to be good friends with the people who invented this little trick, which shouldn’t be a surprise to anybody who does some basic research on who I am. It’s called a Shamu (by the way), you got Shamu’d. The counter, here, is that you do some basic research before accepting a contract.
In the real world, contract scams are a real problem. How much greater would that problem be in the dark abyss of lawless outer space? I think contract scams are good for the game, because this puts the brakes on hauling. Maybe you shouldn’t be hauling quite so much? Maybe you shouldn’t be hauling for strangers?
What this game needs is challenge and difficulty, and where is the challenge in a game where you can get items express delivered from Jita without hassle?
Here’s the thing. In an actual outerspace environment, when you haul your items to the station, what’s to stop the station owner from seizing your ship and cargo? Hm? So I think you got off lucky, if you still have your ship. You should only be hauling to stations that you know and trust, and in this case, you clearly made a mistake.
The contract literally warns you that the destination “might be unavailable”. If I were going to accept such a contract, I would ask myself, “Wait, what if the station is unavailable?” Hm. Now, that’s something to think about in the future!
2 Likes
This is the deep learning that this game offers that you won’t get elsewhere. Plus, The Princess is bringing it with Jackson vibes.
No one can take a station down faster than a wardec goes live.
There’s your counter-play right there.
1 Like
Ok, troll confirmed LOL. Aint no kind agreeable people in mining chat LOL.
2 Likes
Scams are part of the game.
2 Likes
Pardon my limited understanding, Brisc, but isn’t this something they deliberately fixed, then inadvertently broke when they added cores?
4 Likes
That I do not know.
Who cares, there’s still a warning.
The more scams the better!
It’s really simple: if you don’t trust the destination or the trip towards that destination then simply don’t accept the contract. Why should the game cater, and change, to the uninformed, lazy and greedy nitwits who act before thinking? You accepted the contract because it looked better than all the others, why do you think that was the case!
You saw a profitable opportunity and you didn’t think about issues nor did you put in previous effort into learning about the profession/activity you’re doing. You got in trouble due to your own lack of effort.
3 Likes
The cargo deposit was intended to solve this very problem.
Reddit, however, tells me that this solution also added the problem that people could store loot in any random structure and use asset safety to ferry it out without exposing themselves to the risk of hauling it out from where they got it, and excused them from having to abide by the limits of their cargo hold.
I think the decision to disable the cargo deposit under certain circumstances was probably deliberate, but either way it’s probably low priority since people are going to complain whether the feature works or does not work.
(The rest of this post is not targeted at Xeux, given that I think they know this stuff already.)
The more complicated a system, the more likely some people will find a way to explo-. Ahem I mean the more likely some people will find a way to selfishly take advantage of loopholes in that system to benefit themselves at the expense of someone else who doesn’t understand all those rules and the risks they’re taking.
Eve is a scammy place. Only a small list of published exploits can result in retribution by out of game means, and CCP did put some big mean nasty red text on the contract page to warn a hauler that there might be a problem. The warning was ignored and the hauler got screwed, but that’s what happens if you ignore warnings or carelessly click around your windows with significant sums of your isk at stake.
3 Likes