It’s still the same problem, just the numbers are now 100. As soon as you put up a structure, your eligible to be wd’ed. Or just break up the one corp into 99 players per corp to avoid that. And you still would not be able to wd without a structure.
Someone touched on this earlier (@Gloria_Exercitus?): more often than not, the ships in the corporation are going to be worth significantly more than any structure.
The same is probably going to be true for assets - the bare minimum in a structure with anything valuable stored in a NPC station.
Is it really that surprising that most corporations offer up the structure as the sacrificial lamb, bow out and get back to the business of making ISK?
Just an observation…
1 Like
Question: What regions do wardecs have any kind of impact? The only areas I’m seeing are high-sec and to a lesser extent, low-sec. Unless I’m missing something, they really don’t apply in wormhole space or null-sec - at least in the grand scheme of things.
It seems - and again, I could be wrong here - that wardecs merely serve to extend conflicts from other regions to low-sec and high-sec (and to ensure these areas can’t be used as a safe harbor for assets during said conflicts).
If this perception is off - please feel free to clarify for me. Thanks.
That was part of the original idea of HS wars. Hence the description on the eve online website that wars should ‘enable player entities to solve issues’ of any kind. Some of these ‘issues’ would be ‘targeting HS logistic’ of your enemies for example or make sure you can keep attacking your opponents forces even in HS if they would try to hide there.
However, the majority of wars aren’t used this way, they are declared en masse to farm cores, ideally from targets that are pre selected to make sure they can’t muster any significant defense.
So… how could new corporations (and players) be protected from this without also allowing this to be abused by other regions?
Has already be explained: by making such wars unlucrative by default and only lucrative if a target is chosen that is large enough to offer lots of loot from ships in space or multiple fitted stations.
This way the original purpose of wardecs could be fulfilled, smaller corps and their structure(s) could still be attacked and removed from a region if the attacker is willing to burn some money for it, but mass declarations would be pure waste and thus stop all by themselves.
This can be achieved by either making war declarations more costly, cores a lot cheaper or removing cores as a requirement for the basic structure features a small corp would need to use it as home station (docking, fitting, repairing, corphangar).
Only if they would want to use economical services like production, refinery, research etc they would need a core and?they would have to calculate if they can get these costs back with their industry before someone comes to shoot the station.
For Starters, by the Devs going back into the existing code and flipping from OFF to ON the need for star base charters as fuel and Faction Standings to deploy structures.
Anyone Remember the old: Just because you can fly a ship, does not mean you can fly that ship.
This simple thing would be along the same lines as:
Just because you create a corporation, does not mean you can create a corporation.
-or-
Deploying a Structure doe not mean you can Deploy a structure.
Can cores be removed from a structure? In this case if war is declared, the core could just be unfitted from the structure making them not worth attacking for loot.
There’s a 7 day decommissioning phase for a structure, at the end of which the core is dropped.
I thought that structures still required faction standings in low-sec and high-sec to deploy?
Yes, I fought defence in a war in nullsec only a few days ago with no actual wardec and no corp swapping…and status kept green in nullsec. I suspect there being no wardec is because our HQ is in highsec and without an ‘official’ wardec we can fly around safely in highsec and lowsec.
Reading the forum posts from a number of years ago on the matter, one of the most common comments was that it was all deliberately designed as it is because CCP never actually intended smaller corps to be running structures. Thus people are putting up structures when they are in no way ready or able to defend them. Well…EVE being what it is, of course others are going to take advantage of that.
I really don’t think CCP’s response to proposals for a ‘fix’ is going to be anything other than ’ don’t undock what you can’t afford to lose '. Which I think is largely the correct response.
This was posted on Reddit today - thought it was worth sharing.
I think the solution here is to just be smart about it. If you want a structure, scout out a quiet little nook in space and set it up. Don’t place it in Jita or Udema. Use that website that tells you how much recent activity has been in a system.
There are many small quiet corners of High Sec. This is a really big Galaxy! Don’t set up in places with high traffic.
I must have missed the ‘innocent newbie’ speech from Aura. I was just told I’d die lots more times so get over it already.
Just quoting Reddit… I guess you’re innocent until you undock for the first time.
I’ve scouted for stations to bash. It requires a certain ship fitting, probes, hacking stuff, etc. All those ‘off the beaten track’ stations are really not that hard to find. And they can be hacked and scanned to see exactly what they have fitted. If I scout a system…I will find the stations in it.
So we’ve established there’s no safe “off the beaten path” to deploy a structure. Check.
1 Like
The ability to make off-grid deep safes to deploy structures at was removed years ago. You can make it to where your citadel doesn’t show up on the overview, but it can still be scanned down, no matter where it is in the system…
2 Likes
I couldn’t find anything in my searches - there’s no requirements (standings, etc.) to deploy structures?