[13:05] <ccp_larrikin> This FG needs a reddit I don't have to read IDK how many lines of text
[13:08] <querns> whole lotta spergin about stuff that would take too much time to implement
[13:09] <kennethfeld> querns: yeah, based on conversation with larrikin, he is leaning towards just delivering if you are within range of the citadel from space, if you don't have docking rights
[13:09] <kennethfeld> not saying it is feasible, just what he is leaning towards
[13:09] <ccp_larrikin> yeah, what do you think? If you could just be in space next to a citadel and deliver the contract to the citadel, Irrigardless of access rights?
[13:09] <querns> i think that is reasonable
[13:10] <kennethfeld> that is what i told him
[13:10] <kennethfeld> obviously, lowsec and nullsec, will have to be diplo areas, but we already knew that
[13:10] <querns> still risky if you're JFing to lowsec but lowsec i think that is caveat hauler
[13:10] <querns> efb
[13:11] <querns> basically my take on this stuff is that highsec to structures is worth spending some time on, outside of highsec the existing model for outposts/conquerable stations is fine
[13:11] <kennethfeld> yup
[13:11] <kennethfeld> we are basically trying to fix highsec, low and null don't need changes necessarily
[13:12] <kennethfeld> if the hauling companies don't trust XX corp or alliance, they won't deliver to them, plain and simple
[13:16] <exooki> that sums it up very well i think
[13:16] <exooki> not that it needs much attention on this issue, but my attempts to crowd source fromw ormholers, i cant find a single one that thinks theyd be doing anything besides private contracts within corp, or to OOC alts
[13:16] <exooki> for obvious reasons public contracts in WHs wont even work, let alone be trusted
[13:17] <querns> yeah the idea of a public courier to a WH without the benefit of the WH corp's siggy map or w/e is pretty funny
[13:17] <exooki> paying top dollar for someone to find my WH...and bring me stuff
[13:20] <querns> like the only situation where that is even remotely feasible is thera but whoops no citadels in thera :v:
[13:21] <kennethfeld> yeah, we assumed that like hour 1, wh would never do public anything
[13:22] <kennethfeld> this also means hauling companies don't need access to deliver, but will need acces prior to accepting, picking up a courier, but that just means that they have to bring their hauler in before accepting
[13:23] <querns> yeah that is still a minor problem
[13:23] <querns> one that can be worked around, laboriously, by ensuring you can dock at the source before accepting
[13:23] <kennethfeld> also, solves problem with stationless systems
[14:08] <nasantha> I can see an issue with collection whereby the hauler can dock but the individual who you would want to accept the contract cannot and the contract has a container inside. This is more relevant to private contract to a corp than publics but it could happen to either.
[14:10] <kennethfeld> right, but you can both dock PRIOR to accpeting, so that isn't an issue
[14:10] <kennethfeld> if it turns out, one or the other can't dock, don't accept
[14:10] <nasantha> thats just a ballache
[14:10] <kennethfeld> ??
[14:11] <nasantha> if for example we use our contracting alt as a cyno toon as well and we wanted to take a citadel contract, we many have to move that toon 40+ jumps just to take a job that our hauler may only be 3 jumps from
[14:12] <kennethfeld> I am very much willing to chalk that one up to price of doing business
[14:13] <nasantha> Well. I would as well but would customers?
[14:13] <kennethfeld> customers won't know the difference
[14:14] <nasantha> They would as the price would have to be higher
[14:15] <kennethfeld> in reality, if the acceptor couldn't dock, what difference would it make, you are either going to re wrap or not
[14:16] <kennethfeld> and you can either do a re courier or just item exchange
[14:16] <kennethfeld> remotely
[14:16] <nasantha> not if there is a container inside
[14:16] <kennethfeld> ok, so if you could dock and there is a container - how is it different?
[14:16] <cassie_helio> If there is a container inside the only way to get it to another character is in-station trade.
[14:17] <cassie_helio> If you can deliver from the the outside regardless of docking rights, and either contractor or hauler can't dock you'd be stuck with the contract.
[14:17] <cassie_helio> If they removed rights after you accepted then easy scam for them.
[14:20] <cassie_helio> @ccp_larrikin: ^
[14:26] <ccp_larrikin> Do many people accept contracts with containers in them?
[14:27] <cassie_helio> You can't tell until you accept
[14:27] <cassie_helio> The contents are unknown until you accept the contract.
[14:29] <cassie_helio> So it's easy to scam with them. Scam contracts get put up a lot with high collateral but has a container in it with very low value in it. the reason that is not a broken mechanic is because if you're good enough brave enough you CAN deliver the contract if you can get to the station without dying. In the case of citadels, your docking could just be revoked at any time.
[14:32] <cassie_helio> If courier contracts indicated there is a container in the contract that would be a good thing and would ameliorate this issue with delivering to citadels from the outside.
[14:33] <kennethfeld> only assembled container sare an issue
[14:33] <kennethfeld> packaged ones are fine
[14:33] <cassie_helio> The warning wouldn't reveal any information about the contents other than it has a container in it. A container being any item that can contain other items such as containers or other courier packages
[14:33] <cassie_helio> Yes, only assembled containers
[14:34] <kennethfeld> also, we assemble containers and put specific things in them, 3 marines, 2 trit and 4 exotic dancers for instance, that way when we cargo scan, we can tell which freighter is carrying our scam contract
[15:35] <lynfel> As cassie said, the whole pick up/drop off without docking is fine except for the fact that many if not most (all of Red Frog for example) haulers do not use the same character to accept the contract as they do to move it. And currently, when the contract contains a container which we have no way of knowing before we accept it, it has to be manually traded inside both the pick up and drop off stations since it cannot be recontracted with the included container.
[15:42] <lynfel> Technically any "specific things" included in a bait contract would go into the courier package but not inside the assembled container as you cannot see anything inside the double wrapped container with a cargo scanner. Anything inside the double wrapped container does not show up on any loss mail either.
[16:18] <kennethfeld> Yeah, I said it wrong, but putting in a container prevents double wrapping and makes it so you can see your things.
[16:18] <kennethfeld> That still doesn't sound right, but we know what I mean.
[16:33] <cassie_helio> >but putting in a container prevents double wrapping and makes it so you can see your things.
[16:33] <cassie_helio> This isn't right.
[16:33] <cassie_helio> You can't see things in it if it is already double wrapped even if your cargo scan it.
[16:33] <cassie_helio> If you have a container (or other plastic wrap) and you make a couriers contract, it get double wrapped. The container gets placed into the plastic wrap
[16:53] <lynfel> It doesn't really matter as far as this focus group goes though. The fact that you can not currently complete a contract with a container inside of it if you are using one character to accept the original contract and another to transport it without being able to dock both characters to trade the package is the important part that makes the complete without docking not work without making additional changes. Either making it so any character can complete the contract whether or not they accepted it in the first place (which doesn't really help at the pick up end of the contract) or a warning about nested containers included in the contracting interface so that they can just be rejected outright.
[16:53] <lynfel> Obviously I still prefer the freeport idea to this one.
[17:00] <cassie_helio> >a warning about nested containers included in the contracting interface so that they can just be rejected outright.
[17:00] <cassie_helio> This would be fantastic.
[17:39] <kennethfeld> or just put it back and allow infinite nesting
[18:55] <lynfel> That would work too, but it seems like I have heard ccp say it would be hard to code that way in the past.
[19:12] <kennethfeld> remote completion would solve a ton of problems as well
[19:13] <kennethfeld> between remote completion and delivery from tethering range would solve 90% of the issues i think
[19:13] <kennethfeld> pickup isn't an issue for regular haulers, just the hauling companies, they can work around it, it just isn't pretty
[19:48] <cassie_helio> >pickup isn't an issue for regular haulers, just the hauling companies, they can work around it, it just isn't pretty
[19:48] <cassie_helio> I'm not sure I follow.
[19:49] <lynfel> he is assuming that public contracts are hauled by the same person who accepts the contract, which they probably often are but not always.
[19:49] <lynfel> whereas with hauling companies they rarely are
[19:50] <cassie_helio> Not evne hauling companies, just serious haulers. Most of the haulers in Hauler's Channel are not part of a company but still contract to a 2nd hauler alt. It protects your haulers identify and protectd from war decs.
[19:52] <cassie_helio> Is remote completion one of the things we talked about here? If not, remote completion is something that is already available.
[19:52] <cassie_helio> I mean, contracts can be completed from anywhere as long as the package is at the delivery location or was kennethfeld referring to something else?
[19:55] <cassie_helio> But yes, pickup is still an issue for regular haulers as contracting to a 2nd alt is standard practice of hauling. Anyone that is becoming a serious hauler, independent or not, is going to be contracting to a 2nd hauler alt.
[22:00] <kennethfeld> cassie_helio: we assumed remote completion would be in citadels, but so far with the remote stuff (Plex, skill extractors etc) not working we wanted to be clear that remote completion be a priority
[22:00] <kennethfeld> this was prior to todays patch and the certainty that even that worked
[22:12] <cassie_helio> Ah I see.