This came to me in a dream. Seems like an interesting idea, so why not see what the community thinks.
The concept would be to allow an attacker to capture a structure (citadel) intact.
How would it work?
In last 10% of structure allow a citadel structure to be hacked with an entosis link. Successful hack results in the structure turning over to the corp of the player who hacked it. The attackers are now defenders until the timer expires and the structure repairs. This would also transfer any items in any corp hangers within the structure to the new owning corp as a delivery. Player items would remain theirs in the structure.
The defender is faced with a few choices. The defender can kill the attacking force and hacker or force the attackers to destroy the citadel or allow the attackers to take it whole by not stopping the hack/entosis link.
Assets in the structure could be affected by security level of the system or maybe not… Say even low-sec and high-sec corporation hanger items are lost, but with the current system and thoughts for Low-sec and High-sec those items could be kept in the citadel under the initial owners then use the asset safety system already in place.
Even if corporate assets aren’t moved to the new owner corp, the prior corporation and players who had items in station would lose access and be forced to wait for asset safety.
I believe this would also affect the number of structures deployed across new eden as attackers could hack the structure, take it over and pull it down. By taking the structure down it would increase supply of citadel structures and modules to the market and also potentially removing more of the “clutter”. Noting, if the citadel was returned to market it could be deployed again (increasing the clutter).
However, this mechanic would make it more profitable for corporations/alliances to attack and capture vs attack and destroy and overall simply attack structures, increasing PvP in High-sec, Low-sec.
This would be interesting in places like wormholes, where some wormholers who find abandoned structures in their holes could take over those structures rather than having to destroy them.
This would reduce the amount of destruction in the game - which is not a good idea. I do believe it should be easier to clear abandoned or derelict structures. Low power structures should be able to be attacked by anyone at any time in all regions of space without requiring a war declaration and should not have a reinforcement timer - using an entosis link to reduce the hitpoints and make removing them even easier would be a good idea!
Indeed, but those stations couldn’t be destroyed. They were captured and reused. This gives corporations more flexibility when it comes to wars and attacking structures for gain capture, use, remove and take the modules or destroy it.
The WH not made by Azar_Azorious is also very positive. If you rolled a group out of their WH you could attack and take over the structure. This would also allow “abandoned” citadels in WHs to be captured and used which is of more value in my opinion than blowing it up for a kill mail and the dice roll to see what drops.
But it would also become more profitable for people to try and take down citdels. ATM, you play the dice roll on what drops as far as modules. In High-Sec and Low-Sec all you’ll get is the salvage from the structure maybe some ammo and fuel with a module or two.
If you could attack it then take it over, strip it down and unanchor then sell it all off there would be more profit. I believe it would increase content, maybe less actual structures exploding, but they’d come down as people attacked them for isk. Thus, I believe making it viable to attack these on a for profit basis, vs for a moon position or security reason.
That profit would come at the expense of those who sell citadels on the market, which knocks onto producers of modules, components, raw materials etc. This also removes the risk involved in anchoring a structure.
Destruction is the only game viable means to deal with citadels.
The current risk to a structure wouldn’t be mitigated by this mechanic.
The structure could be attacked and destroyed or attacked an captured both resulting in the person or corp who anchored the structure losing it.
If the structure was captured, then prior owner could fight to gain control back, which would lead to more fights, more content and more ship destruction. Sure it could drive down costs for structures on market, but you can’t pull rigs off when you unanchor so there would still be a demand for rigs.
But they usually have to drop a structure in that hole to use for a base to take out the other structures. And all the items in the blown up structure are ejected into space to be scoop able.
-1
When a group siege a WH that is standard. But, it’s also possible to siege a WH with POS tower since they are still in the game (for now). Regardless, if the structure is abandoned or not defended a player or small group could attack and take over the structure using an ORCA as a base.
I believe, now correct me if I’m wrong, but when you blow up a structure it is a dice roll on what drops. Now, if a structure is decommissioned everything comes out in containers spread about 150k from the center of the old structure. So, a force could take control of the structure then unanchor it getting “everything” not just some things.
There are many, but it’s very time intense and not all the profitable to attack and remove them… Now, if you made it so people could attack and remove them and obtain all the fit modules and services plus anything in a corp hanger it would make it more worth it…
I think you’d see more people attacking structures, because as it is today, its not that profitable. An Athnor with a miner some modules and a service plus some fuel blocks and ammo after salvaging the wreck is around 500mil.
Allowing people to attack, take ownership and unanchor would lead to less (even if they are put up again someone can just take it back down).
The structure, if a group took control and unanchored it, would need to transport it to market the sell. So, it would still be in a hauler at some point. If anything, the cycle of anchoring and unanchoring would increase leading to more structures in haulers, more players attacking those haulers, more players engaging structures for the isk.
It’s more content in every way. Just because something is attacked, taken control of, doesn’t mean it won’t explode, or be unachnored and destroyed before it hits market (Gankers, War Targets, others in parts of space not high-sec).
A structure bash team would never use an orca baset. A POS is used all the time and you can have just about all the benefits of a structure plus the guns.
This is a silly idea. I do agree with the thinking of making structures more profitable to clear away dead ones, but the structure nerf made the medium ones very very weak. Why on earth should you have a warp disruption timer because you are a structure you already break all locks after the engagement timer is over or the round is won.
Destruction is and would still be a valid option. This would just give the attackers the option to take control and decommission. Blowing it up vs taking control is still a valid option as is someone stealing the unacnhored structure or having it blown up while in cargo.
I get there are “too many” structures according to many. This would be a way to help create incentives to do something about them vs spending 2 the 3 weeks on timers and getting 100-300 mil for a non fit or poorly fit structure.