We are playing the same EVE right?
The one where Corp leaders invite people into corps with friendly fire on to gank them, where people do recruitment fee scams, etc. It’s not a stretch, it’s totally something people would do.
I didn’t even get started on what happens to the people that take a long break.
The long and short of it is that if you want citadels to get used they have to have asset safety as a freebie.
I’m not against the asset safety recovery fee being larger mind you, I feel it is a bit cheap at 0.5% in some situations. But it’s a needed feature to allow people to actually take risks with building structures and basing out of them, and knowing they aren’t going to get screwed by things out of their control when they aren’t in space.
You get both those features introduced and you just created a stomping ground where only the largest entities or their pets can ever have structures.
This is even worse, since it creates a direct isk siphon that requires no conversion at all, especially in highsec, wardec, attack someone and get all your costs back plus more. However… Higher asset safety costs creates more loot without any need to hand some to the attackers. Because higher asset safety costs increases the incentive to risk a few T1 ships to fight which then drop some additional loot. Especially if those ships are already in the structure.
Also there aren’t that many structures. They are just more visible than POS were, but in nearly every system there are fewer structures than there are POS. (I’m sure you can find an exception somewhere like a system with only two moons or something).
But they do already drop loot, you should be getting several hundred million in salvage, plus module drops.
That sounds better, not worse. Defend your ■■■■ and it won’t go into asset safety, simple. More fights is never a bad thing.
Honestly, I just wanna see stuff die. Whether there are “too many” or not. Going to bash a structure is always boring, frustrating, and unrewarding.
I don’t fit a salvager to my combat ship… 9 times out of 10 when I’m killing something, space is way too hot to have a hauler/salvager alt anywhere near it.
An incentive to work with structure owners rather than just use them would be nice. It’s hard to create that situation without making unrealistic expectations on players.
Have an alt, or a friend. Or come back 5 minutes later while the rest of the fleet guards the wreck.
However that clashes with this.
Either a fight is happening in which case there is loot from the fleets on grid as well, therefore there should be plenty of loot, or a fight isn’t happening so you can salvage happily. It can’t be both at once.
Sure, stuff should die, structure attacks maybe need changing somehow to be more interesting, maybe structures shouldn’t be one monolithic ball of EHP and instead should have a bunch of components as well as the core EHP. But the engine currently doesn’t support that kind of thing in any easy fashion.
The only addition I’d make to it, is a reverse asset safety option.
That is, asset safety is great for players that are taking a break, or are on holidays, or working extended hours for a while, etc., and can’t login
With this proposal, through little fault of their own, they could login and all their assets are gone.
Currently they can move everything into asset safety manually and go away knowing that they won’t lose assets.
However when they return to the game, all their assets are going to be in a different location and they’d need to get them and bring them all back, assuming the original Citadel didn’t get killed in their absence.
So that’s where I think a reverse asset safety function would be good. Pay ISK to have everything put back.
That way, players who can’t login for a while could protect their assets through a bit of preparation and then get them back where they were, when they come back.
Hmm… to be honest, 99 times out of 100 you know you’re going to be taking a break. In those 99 times, if you decide not to ensure your assets are in a long term location, you kind of deserve what’s coming to you. Especially if it’s well known that your stuff can easily go poof.
Point in case, wormhole citadels. You don’t leave stuff there unless you’ve already written it off as gone (and it’s a nice surprise if it isn’t).
For me, I know that I can suitcase in caps and leave them in LS stations. They’ll probably be safe there. That is in fact the advice we give all members when they say they’re gonna take a break.
It’s usually not more than a few jumps. That of course only really works for people with caps, but honestly, hiring blackfrog or paying a corpmate to do it wouldn’t be bad either.
On the flip side, elective asset safety with a 30 day delivery window does feel like a good option for people who have no other option.
Go back and read the devblog for why they put it in to begin with.
Stations are supposed to be safe places to store wealth to create a reason for playing in the first place. We aren’t playing Battlefield where stuff is free.
Part of the goal is to remove all permanent stations eventually, leaving you with just asset safety as the only reason you can build anything at all on a personal level.
Oh I’m quite familiar with it. Carebears may not be aware that in null, stations may not have ever lost your assets, but you could be locked out from them (in concept, forever). Asset safety offers more than we had.
I’m sympathetic to those who need their hand held, and I don’t expect harsh reality for them all, but asset safety as it is, is too much.