Corporations as primary sov holder

  • Jumpgates can only be deployed and used by corporations. Limited to a fixed number.
  • Corporations can deploy a fixed number of structures (for example one Keepstar) called primary structures. Primary structures has shield, armor and hull timer. Any structure above this limit has zero times, killable in one hit.
  • Only corporations can participate in fozzie sov defense or formally pay a recurring contract with 10-15% npc tax to other corps to enable their ability to help defend sov.

You have shown you know very little about null.

Corporations are the only ones that can anchor ansiblexs anyway, limiting them to corp usage would be a pain in the arse for everyone.
Corps being allowed to only anchor an ammount before theres no timers in defence screws the entire game over, including wormholes, high sec, lowsec.
Again, Corporations can only participate in fozzie sov :')

Again, Corporations can only participate in fozzie sov :')

They can participate in their alliance fozzie sov.

Corps being allowed to only anchor an ammount before theres no timers in defence screws the entire game over, including wormholes, high sec, lowsec.

Nullsec only rules for structures and/or limit put on sovholding corps. Different ruleset exists for FW and WH already. It needs to be expanded upon.

Corporations are the only ones that can anchor ansiblexs anyway, limiting them to corp usage would be a pain in the arse for everyone.

Pain in the arse for big blocs to exist and power project from home system? Good.

No need to be edgy.

the aim of the game and its mechanics is to allow conflicts between players to occur.
you are aware that you sleep some hours every day, yes? and that your corpmates are most often living in the same tz?
what sort of conflict would happen when hostiles can come and destroy your structures in one hit while you and your corpmates are sleeping?

and big blocks are large group of people who cooperate to get stronger. Artficially limiting that, with a deus ex-machina mechanism, “because grrrr big blocks”, is a non sense
Nothing prevents yourself from cooperating with other people, other corps, even without belonging to any alliance

This is a good point.

On the flip side…an off TZ org can anchor a structure in your space when you are asleep and have the kill timer in your off TZ. Another issue is spamming one system with unlimited forts, keepstars etc for defensive purposes. The core of the problem is that nullsec structures are, in my opinion, a net negative conflict driver. This is if our defenition of good conflict is quality and quantity of fights happening.

Because of this I say limit them and perhaps introduce some other type of structure that makes it interesting to fight over - preferrably continously and not a 15min window.

Nothing prevents people from cooperating but the NS game mechaics should incentivice corps or smaller alliances to strike it out on their own and fight for space. Unrestricted ACL’s, unrestricted structures and unlimited jumpgates with 15 min repair timers leads to one thing - helldunk or blueballs and what happened on Serenity.


If a group fails at the game because they don’t have the diplomacy skills to negotiate a space and/or want to remain small, why should CCP help them at all?

They should sink or swim on their own and their own goals and motivations should be incentive enough.

1 Like


Who has the budget for this?

Good idea, now find a way to implement it wothour destroying the game. Or at all!

1 Like

Why not have NS game mechanics that drives conflict and oportunities for smaller groups to split from a bigger group and not be friendly to half the galaxy? Oh, idk… fun per hour, intrigue and action?

Besides. alliances usually has holding corps and limit the amount of structures that corps can put down so that, for example, a disgruntled corp can not become a strategic problem. This helps alliances tremendously in growing too big.

The new devblog was a great read in regards to this direction. Very exciting. Here’s a snippet:

On funding, we have prioritized Contested Income (formerly known as passive income) - a source valuable enough to take, hold, and defend.

I clearly state that it is my opinion that citadels stifle quantity and quality of fights.

I guess you are taking “unlimited” litterally.

NS alliance income scales too well with N+1 alliance members at the moment (another incentive for large alliances). The more income they get the more structures they can spam in key systems for locking a big region or area down. Hence structures promotes alliances to grow big as possible both geographically and member size if there are no limitations on structure spam.

I’ve shared some idéas and discussed them. How would you increase quality and quantity of conflict in NS?

So your answer to why is simply, why not?

If you want to be a small group against the world then go do it. Put your big boy pants on and go have fun. Asking for CCP to make mechanics changes for you to assist is the kind of soft thing that weak, entitled players want.

CCP don’t owe anything to any group. If you want it, go take it.

Yes, why not have mechanics that drives conflicts and incentivices not to join into as large a group as possible? I agree that CCP don’t owe anything to any group, this would be silly.

I’m just here to since I like the game and want it to have more quality and quantity fights in NS. Structures currently smothers this fun aspect of the game. Not looking to get on a personal level or roleplay - whatever it is you are trying to instigate.

CCP already aim to do this. Nullsec is driven by conflict and always has been.

Because, nullsec is player driven. If you want to go take space, then go take it. If you aren’t good enough, then crying to CCP to give you assistance over groups that are better than you should receive a big middle finger response.

Thanks for bumping my post and help getting my point across. You have been a usefull tool.

Also, quote from Hy Wanto

[…] The fact that citadels provide such a huge defender advantage has accelerated the n+1 mentality because it encourages attackers to batphone and form more because they know that they cant really take an equal fight on an enemy citadel and then that in turn will just encourage the defender to batphone. The knock on effect of this results in either huge blob fights or blueballs and fights fizzling out. […]

The above is agreed upon by the following from main FCs from the respective groups, in no particular order:

No handlebars. :



Rekking Crew :


Dreadbomb. :


Spectre Fleet :

Virion Stoneshard

Snuffed Out :

Tau AD

Hy Wanto Destroyer

Dock Workers :


Hard Knocks Citizens :

Kappa Pride

Solyaris Chtonium :


DarkSide. :

Weedle R


Siberian Squad :

Hanzo Viper

Legion of xXDEATHXx :

Konstantin Surovij

Siege Green.


The Army of Mango Alliance :


Fraternity. :


Brave Collective :

Shattered Armer

NullSechnaya Sholupen :



Triumvirate. :

Garst Tyrell




Pandemic Legion :


Northern Coalition. :

Vince Draken


Pandemic Horde :




Johnny Trousersnake

Test Alliance Please Ignore :


Karmen Jell

The Initiative. :

Dark Shines


Goonswarm Federation :

John Hartley

Elo Knight


Streamer :

Bjorn Bee

Toilette Paper :


Phoenix Naval Systems :

Daniel L’Siata

Shadow Cartel :

Waylo Azomi

FC for Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork :

Bei Artjay

Half Empty


This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.