Update on Asset Safety values for Supers & Titans

EVE Information Portal Announcements
184

And you determined this how (that people were not caught up in RL)? I was in Denver (I live in Raleigh, NC) at a Kung Fu festival the whole long weekend when this happened. I think that qualifies as RL, right?

Losing a whole lot of ISK to pull your asset out of Asset Safety IS a loss, not to mention the loss of EVE family and friends, breakup of Corporations, shifting alliances, logisitics of moves, additional losses trying to move and maneuver into new locations, setbacks, shifting priorities of leadership… Are you saying someone should lose EVERYTHING they’ve purchased and built for years? Maybe a decade or more… because they were out of town when an event happened?

The loss of time and a portion of tangible assets, and the investment over years in a Corp/Alliance, are already “real” and have a huge impact. You want the penalty to be unlimited in scope? If the game worked like that, yeah, I’d quit playing.

If the shoe were on the other foot, I wonder if you would be so harsh in the penalty you, as the gamekeeper, would make. I think you would lose your shirt and have far fewer participants. This already has a hugely significant impact on the losing side.

2 Likes
185

No he probably doesn’t say that.

What he probably means is:

  • someone who “plays for maybe a decade or more” should already know not to store EVERYTHING he owns at a single station. Especially not a station that is vulnerable for attacks. He had a decade or more to create an invincible fallback asset cache in HighSec and to liquify valueable assets into ISK that cannot be taken away
  • an alliance holding space should actively teach their members to keep the hangars slim, sell stuff that has stockpiled and isn’t immediately used frequently to someone that needs it or in a trade hub
  • someone who is so rich that he owns Titan or Supers can be expected to simply board that thing if he goes on vacation for multiple days. Logged out ships are a 100% safe. And those ships have even large storage bays to fill with other extremely valuable items like BPOs, AT ships, Deadspace/Officer Items etc pp. So, fill it, log out and you have more stuff left than 99% of all other EVE players have, even if all the rest gets destroyed
  • someone who plays this long will have made friends and established ways to communicate even if he is offline. Whatsapp exist. Discord exist. Email exist. Facebook, whatever. Everyone can install the app on his phone if EVE pixels are that important to him. Get a message if your station comes under attack. Decide if you want to find a way in the next 3 days (!) to log in once and put all your stuff into already prepared logoff-freighters and call it a day. Or not, then all the stuff you haven’t covered in points 1 to 3 is going to burn down, so what, you will still be extremely rich. Wormhole people sometimes have to trash billions over billions if they can’t bring stuff out in time and the attckers hold the system.

The whole point is, that you are obviously too lazy to properly prepare for an emergency situation and expect the game dev to offer you a simple 1-click solution.

2 Likes
186

If demand had increased for the Avatar, shouldn’t the fair price of the Avatar be higher than the other capitals? For things that can be sold in Jita, more demand without increased supply increases the prices. So 15% of this should be higher. Titians are obviously less liquid, and you can’t just go to Jita and look for the cheapest Avatar hull. So one of two possibilities I see. One is that the original formula worked and the numbers are higher for certain capital ships because they are in more demand and their “black market” value is higher. Another is that you just had a bug in the formula the Avatar was overvalued because of this flaw and you could have done something like “Hey guys, we found a bug in the asset safety calculation formula, it will be adjusted on 8 DEC. If you want, you can wait with withdrawing your ships until then”

187

why? because it prevents massive loot drops from long afk players or because its to expensive to get your high end items back after returning to game? on is defo a problem. the other is a bunch of hardliner bs that would make masses quit forever

188

Has been explained in the topic. That you didn’t even bother to read it, is exactly fitting to the problem we are discussing.
It is a 1-click magic safety mechanic for incredibly lazy people that has thrown the game into a dull era of political stalemates where neither defender nor attacker have any reason to fight. Because there is literally nothing important to gain from fighting any more. The huge Capital- und Supercapital Fleets or stockpiles of war assets of your opponents cannot be trapped, destroyed and looted any more, they are simply “beamed away” to the next station. And of course no attacker risks to bring an own expensive fleet to the table to loot a crappy core and some fuel blocks. Because if it goes wrong and he gets thirdpartied, he lost multiple billions in a scenario where he had absolutely no chance go gain anything of comparable value.

It can be totally expected from someone who wants to make a long-term afk break to simply move his stuff to an NPC station OR sell it to his group OR put his most valuable stuff into log-off ships and donate the rest to his alliance so the active players can use it. It can literally be done in less than 30 minutes if you would care to prepare in time.

2 Likes
189

totally disagree.

infact i feel both asset safety and insurance should be better as to many players i know have left after devastating losses of years of work. There needs to be attitude change to improve eve’s risk reward balance so players feel a bite but never want to quit or stop playing

190

Facts > Feelings

If you want cozy gameplay with little responsibility, effort and planning, HighSec is your area.
If you want the big rewards and opportunities of NullSec, stop being lazy and entitled to magic safety mechanisms and actually save your stuff yourself!

And yes, remove “Insurance” everywhere outside HS and inside HS for everyone who set their safety settings to anyhing else then “green”.

191

you are not speaking facts. you are just spouting your own opinions. And your ideas would kill the game in a year

192

@CCP_Swift any update on when the reimbursements will happen? Been a while since this was posted.

193

oh I do.

  • even the biggest WH alliances (yes, those with capital fleets and hundreds or thousands of members) show that you can live and manage vulnerable assets in an area without asset safety (fact)
  • even nullsec alliances could find NS->HS connections via a very short WH-route inside their own controlled space multiple times a week. That is how WH-groups extract stockpiles in Ore, Gas, PI or products they don’t immedately use. NS alliances could do exact that too. It would just require them to scan for the connections. (fact)
  • you can establish member training programs that have EVAC haulers (30.000mÂł per char) covered for the newbros, go over DSTs (65.000mÂł per char), to Orcas (100.000mÂł + 180.000mÂł materials) to Freighters (up to 1.000.000mÂł per char) for the veterans. Everyone who joins my group is given advice on when to skill each ship, how to fit them and how to use them to secure stuff in case of an emergency. So, such a concept does work (fact)
  • you can establish a culture of “keeping the stockpiles slim” through constant hints to your members to only own what they can evacuate in case of an emergency. You can support them by offering internal buybacks and markets so material stockpiles can be given quickly to those producers who need them. You can also support them by scanning for HS wormhole chains and pinging adequate ones so anyone who needs to bring stuff out can do that on a regular basis. You can teach them to use pochven for a quick-and-easy extraction process. You can hold LS-hangars on NPC stations close to your borders to have a fallback cache for your members they can somewhat easily access with a JumpFreigther or Carrier to transport materials, products and ships. (fact)
  • you can support your members by having a variety of “shared ships” in the hangars so not everyone needs to have a private ship for a certain usecase that only appears once a month. Teach the members to only own those ships they fly, let the alliance cover the rest. Nobody needs a private 100 ships on a single upwell station. (fact)
  • someone logging out in a Super, stuffed from bottom to top with his most expensive items (BPOs, faction/deadspace/officer modules, and most valuable subcaps can lose everything else on that station and if he comes back in a year or two, he will still be among the top 1% richest players in the game, he has absolutely nothing to complain about but everything he needs for a glorious re-start (fact).

Absolutely not. Those “ideas” are actually from a time where people would be required to have a sitting-char for their supers or anchor a POS to store them. Or where an enemy POS could be completely bubbled, razed and everything trapped inside dropped or got destroyed. Or you could conquer an outpost and whatever they didn’t evacuate simply got stuck there until they did a firesale or brought in a new member inside the attackers alliance (which sometimes could take months). So you actually could cut-off opponents from war-stockpiles and you could trap their assets for a long time and you could loot large parts of the losers riches as reward for your efforts and risks of bringing large fleets to the table.
And gues what, the game grew and was full of political conflict. Just look at a political map from 15 years ago and compare to today. And Citadel design has a large share in that.

194

Thoughts about the stagnation of “why should I siege a station when nothing drops” because they just toss everthing into asset safety. How can we make allainces want to conduct warefare against keepstars, and make defenders maybe want to defend.

I think CCP should at least make it worth those involved in attacking worth their time beyond a core drop maybe some fitting off of the station. How about the involved allainces that destory the station get a % of the Asset safety cost. like 10% of the value of each thing pulled out of asset safety, directly deposited into the allainces wallet. So now you are paying CCP and The allaince(s) that blow your station up to get your capitals back. It is still cheaper to asset safety it in some regards but you also have to figure in how much liquid isk does each pilot have on hand to get their toys back. Also how do they feel about paying their enemy that in turn can be used to go blow up another station. Eventually it will force the defenders to undock and attack or they just keep feeding the war machine.

195

Honestly this looks like a bailout to the upper ups of PH (and just those with super, anyone with just subcaps are all out of luck). It’s possible there was a bug in the mysterious formula. But even if there was a bug, I don’t understand why CCP didn’t just say “oops we had a bug, we fixed it and paid back anyone who got the old formula” since this announcement basically screams bailout even if it really was a bug and it was a coincidence. CCP Swift used to be a player and well…

Could they have chosen any other employee other than the one who

made a big deal of looting high sec structures when the asset safety changes were made to write the post

cause having the ex-player who abused a change in asset safety to announce new asset safety changes is just bad PR.

Why shouldn’t’ the Avatar be higher priced in asset safety than the others anyways? It was in more demand (at least as of 2021, I assume it’s still the same) so logically unless supply can keep up demand will drive it higher.

196

You have stated nothing based on fact about the game as it stands now. there are infinite more super pilots than when sitting pilots were needed. sitting pilots are not a practical solutions. Your ideas are about greifing other players to the point they quit. not about having fun space battle regularly that have a healthy risk/reward feel. POS are a dead mechanic and even if they weren’t the ability to bubble players in and keep their assets logged on would have been changed long ago if it was not for their side-lining to structure. All you are doing is moaning

You live in the past of Eve. Dreaming of some hardcore death penalties and tactical elitism that is not representative of how the vast majority play or would want to play eve. EVE has to cater to the masses not the hardcore. there is a balance between the thrill of risking loss or reward vs practical impacts of losing days/weeks/months or years of time. most people want a safe thrill and will accept a minor loss in exchange for a moderate thrill. And almost no one will want to play a game where they can lose everything while offline.

197

The masses of players do not have supers nor do they have Titans. Only the hardcore have these. They should be expected to be able to take steps to secure them. The fact that large alliances can just whelp a whole super fleet and have replacements already built is a problem.

1 Like
198

Why not? You are saying that if an alliance whelps a super fleet it should be effectively dead.

That the hostile should then be able to move their umbrella of supers in and be unchallengeable from that point on. Yea thats super fun for everyone… wonder how long that game will stay fun..

Thousands of players have supers and titans now. more every weeks. its the end game for most. you are living in 2011. Demanding things that are impractical for most.

And its only a problem if you think the game should be played the way you want it to. There are a great many who would rather field supers regularly and have fun figthts with smaller losses

You are advocating only 1 way the game can be played. There is no reason that everyone should want to play the same style of super high deathpenatly high stakes EVE as you. Maybe if you don’t like softer more fun EVE you should be the one to leave? Rather than make others want to quit by killing years of their hard work.

1 Like
199

I could not agree more.

If the “hardcore” answer to a super whelp is “your alliance should effectively die forever and the hostile umbrella becomes unchallengeable,” that isn’t risk vs reward, it’s a stagnant map where the biggest blob locks the board and everyone else is told to uninstall.

The “you’re living in 2011” point is what the grief-posters keep dodging.
Supers and titans aren’t mythical trophies anymore. Thousands of players have them and more get built constantly. EVE is a 20+ year-old game with an older playerbase. Jobs, kids, sleep cycles. “Be online mid-week or lose years of progress” doesn’t create brave last stands, it creates more consolidation, bigger blue donuts, and people quietly logging off for good.

Which is why all this goon salt is funny.
Goonswarm alone is around 65,650 characters. From that altitude, “why didn’t you fight for your assets” basically means “why didn’t you line up for a content slaughter so I could feel like you were punished properly.” Especially when the mess started because a small slice of leadership screwed up and then went absent with no plan, no coordination, everyone on their own. The rational response for most adults isn’t “heroic last stand into a 50k coalition,” it’s “use the mechanic CCP put in the game so you don’t lose everything while you need to take care of real life”.

And asset safety isn’t free. It’s not “return to start.” You pay a major fee, you wait, then you spend days/weeks doing logistics hell to move and re-stage into a new home. Firesales and lose value on a lot. That’s real consequence, just not the “you had work and kids, so you deserve to lose everything” fantasy some posters are mourning.

CCP is correcting a wonky valuation so comparable hulls don’t get charged wildly different fees, reimbursing overpayments after a cutoff date, and not clawing back anyone who paid less. If you’re mad about that, you’re not defending gameplay, you’re mad you don’t get to keep a pricing bug as a punishment multiplier.

If your “risk” only feels real when it deletes years of progress because someone has a real life, you don’t want balance, you want a public execution.

The goal should be getting people to log in and undock, not designing “hardcore” 2011 rules that mostly just make the average adult player quit. EVE needs enemies to shoot, not empty space to brag about.

2 Likes
200

You have no interest in the value of your time spent playing the Game, for example, by the building up of the experience level of your character and the items your character accumulates during your time playing the Game

i think some people think that this doesn’t apply to them.. at the end of the day is a video game, quit making it seem like all this belongs to you when at the end of the day it doesn’t..

201

Hmm, how did that saying go? Oh yes, “Don’t fly what you can’t afford to lose.”. Anyone willing to risk a super in combat likely has a replacement for when it inevitably goes boom.

202

A single station? Every Keep was destroyed throughout the PH. There was nothing to inform a lot of people, nor me, that our Keeps were “Vulnerable to attack” any more so than any other corporation’s Home System.

”actively teach… keep hangars slim, “sell stuff that has stock-piled.”
No, that was not taught. What I don’t use today, I might use tomorrow or next week or next month. If that were taught, I imagine I’d follow some plan for that. But it wasn’t necessary for years or decades, in my experience.

”logged out”, “fill ships with valuable items”?
Guy, the ships are filled with various fits. You are not going to convince me that you empty your ships of fits every time you log off and put your items into the ships. You are making ish up.

So I’m on a flight half the day, gone to bed for the Martial Arts festival the weekend. Learning a new form one day, testing all day the next, eat and back to the hotel, sleep, get on a flight for half of another day, and crash. Go to work the next day. Log in to Eve. Boom. Things have changed.

I know Eve is your life, obviously. I have real life, family, out-of-town parents to visit and provide for, martial arts classes, filmmaking… I can’t enjoy some Eve without stressing that on the rare chance my huge corporation bites the dust, I lose EVERY piece in the Keep.

I’m glad you don’t own this game… most people wouldn’t play, and you would go bankrupt.

Everyone playing Eve, even people who want to field big toys, that doesn’t mean they don’t have a real life. One year, I spent 3.5 weeks in China visiting temples, sampling the culture. Was I supposed to drag my laptop around and play Eve?

You have no perspective.

I’m not the lazy one. Playing a game 24/7 is not the opposite of being lazy.

What you suggest does not have to be law, and I’m glad you do not run CCP.

203

A ship sitting in a hangar is not “in combat.”