Only just now caught wind of this. As a moderator of haulers channel i’m very happy to hear this is finally going to be a feature. Granted it probably should have been there with the release of structure couriers, but better late than never.
The weapons timer seems obvious enough (no depositing things in a pvp situation to save them) but the cloak seems a bit odd, and it does seem like this would disadvantage certain ships used for hauling (blockade runners) for no other reason. If someone can not dock and wishes to deposit items while cloaked, i don’t see any reason to block that - you can’t cloak in combat and you’d still need to dock (and approach/decloak/undock) to actually retrieve the items anyway.
I definitely think it shouldn’t be covered under “all combat timers” though, since that would still put the cards in the hand of gankers over anyone else; they’d just need an alt in a corvette to poke a freighter (or other ship) once, then be bumped indefinitely by a machariel and allow gankers to destroy the hauler’s ship at their leisure. Tying it to weapons timers makes more sense.
EDIT: personally, i think maybe a distinction should be made by security status. I don’t think anyone will complain about “zero risk” on depositing items in a system with NPC stations, since in any situation they might use a dropbox they can use an NPC station instead. In null, considering sovereignty, it might be okay to disable drop boxes since realistically, nobody unaffiliated with the owners is expected to do “normal business” there.
I definitely think it shouldn’t be covered under “all combat timers” though, since that would still put the cards in the hand of gankers over anyone else; they’d just need an alt in a corvette to poke a freighter (or other ship) once, then be bumped indefinitely by a machariel and allow gankers to destroy the hauler’s ship at their leisure. Tying it to weapons timers makes more sense.
Yes this could potentially be abused in high sec but it’s not a legitimate concern as you can be bumped anywhere at any point. The consequences of not tying it to the log-off timer, in low-sec and null-sec, has a far greater, negative, impact on the game.
It is actually a legitimate concern, since there’s few situations in which you can tell a hauler will be in a very specific location, outside of range of gate guns and unable to be webbed to safety (if a freighter) or having to do a slow align away from the safety of a docking ring or gate otherwise.
That said, i stand by my point (made in my edit): separating the mechanics a bit between highsec, lowsec and null make sense to me, leaving the dropbox functionality only in the same place you have NPC stations that would give the same safety of items dropped there anyway.
The scope is far beyond haulers with this mechanic even though that’s what it is intended for. Separating the mechanics could be a feasible solution; allowing another form of asset protection for 0 cost in low & null is unacceptable.
So this is good and really bad idea in same time. Drop stuff into shiatadel ok. But only IF you’re allowed to dock in or be thetered.
Because there a bunch of situations where deliver without be allowed will be bad for game play…
1st: you kill scam contracts
2nd: you catch a retarted JF or Carrier on a “freeport” citadel so he will just drop his cargo before die to citadel…
3rd: Spais will be delivried with ships and stuff into your shietadel by neutrals toons for not being burned.
For real boyz… start to thing about all cituations you can get in game before release it…
Check Bowhead who was one of your failure… become a Incursion exclusive transport ship.
Yep that pretty much does it. Another thing too, Say I have another corp help mine a moon that I was given permission to mine, I have access to dock, but they do not, They can still drop the ore off and contract it over to me. This will also prevent alliances from shutting access to their stations for corp members who want stuff moved.
I’m sorry ,but how is that a bad thing? It’s not like scams will be impossible, but they’re require actual interaction in space, ganking the hauler, rather than using the game mechanics to force a scam to occur without any time, effort or risk for the scammer. Removing absolutely zero effort/risk scams is definitely a step in the good direction.
How am i “wrong”? People are complaining about structure scams being no longer a thing, when they were basically zero effort. It’s not like scams didn’t exist before structures, nor like scams involving courier contracts weren’t a thing before structure contracts. Maybe certain scammers having to spend any amount of effort is too much now, they expect to just keep their “give me isk” buttons, but that’s not something that should stop a game mechanic from being added to benefit the majority.
@Senlok this specifically is adding a game mechanic to add counterplay to the existing onesided nature of courier contracts combined with structure access. Literally no mechanic is being removed from the game.
so in your opinion, we can’t remove the cheapest, least interactive scams because it might mean any other scams go. That’s a fallacy that, if applied in this way, would literally mean no further development to eve ever again, since you can’t touch on really anything without affecting some other mechanic or playstyle.
What are your arguments against this specific mechanic?
If I had to ballpark the usage of this mechanic:
25% will be used by people delivering contracts in both high and null
60% will be used by people mining on athanors, specifically rorquals
15% will be used by people in active combat situation ie: pointed etc on a citadel in low/null
Yes the mechanic is intended for delivering contracts without having access to the structures, but you can not ignore the other effects it will have on the game. It buffs rorqual mining which is the opposite of what this game needs. It also pushes the game one more step away from having to risk assets.
IMO the risking assets part is actually being added when it comes to courier contracts / the scammers. For two years now, scammers have been able to use the mechanic to scam billions with the button CCP provided them, with no counterplay and no risk.
If it does prove an issue with rorqs in null, it should probably be coupled to security status, so that highsec/lowsec can have the mechanic it needs without offering a loophole in null. I’m guessing it’ll need usage statistics first though, since realistically rorq mining is happening in a few select areas with well established structures/safety anyway.
There’s this persistent delusion among a lot of players that because scamming is allowed in Eve, preserving scams must be some sort of design goal, which is clearly absurd.
It’s generally good, imo, that CCP typically doesn’t specifically seek to patch scams out of the game. This is really more of an effort to make public courier contracts to player-structures viable and achieve feature parity with old-style stations. Scams are simply collateral damage, and preservation of existing scams isn’t something that should be given a moment’s consideration in feature design.
I do think allowing deposits of any cargo is a bit of an overreach, though. Limiting it specifically to courier packages/plastic wrap would resolve the issue of infeasible courier contracts while avoiding many or all of the issues some folks have raised.
As a solo miner, with no alts, I appreciate the aspect of depositing ore via cargo deposit. That way it shortens the issue of warping to station, docking, removing ore, undocking, warping… When i can warp, drop, and warp back.
