No, it’s not mutual and they are also not allies of anyone else. And yea it’s been reported too, just was wondering.
Don’t try to kill a good thing
They are trying to introduce people to how to run a corporation without having the worry of a war deck until they get big enough and enough ISK in their wallet to put down the structure
I don’t know all the numbers on the comes to the moon’s but I see them as a Content driver or that’s what CCP want them to be CCP in my opinion then this is only my opinion want the ganking gaming High security space
moons of the way to do it if your moon is worth a crap you would have a fleet of people ready to defend it it’s called throw away characters even with an orca you get enough catalyst you can take that baby down with a matter of seconds
so once again it’s called having the numbers to defend it if you can’t defend your moon don’t have it that’s why I don’t have it I’m a two-man Corporation there is no way in the world but I am going to buy have a moon what I like to sure is it going to happen anytime soon no
PS I still vote for the Hella Miss Kitty skin on the orca, porpoise and also all the mining barges examiners
Isn’t a good thing. They are still going to be just as useless when faced with their first war dec, except they will have more to lose and they can’t hide their structure for a week. They can’t warp their structure out when a hostile enters local.
All i foresee is carebear whine about how their structures should be invincible, and how dare other players come to knock their sandcastles over.
I spoke to a lot of solo small gang war deckers around that period, some were posting on the forums about the lack of targets, I at the time questioned their target selection. So what makes you different to the people who told me that they had no content from their multiple war decs. I pointed out that it is likely your superior target selection.
OK, I write things in a rush at times.
WHat I am saying is that there had been a move towards hub/pipe hunters before the watch list change, and that the watch list removal killed off those that were still doing it apart from a few people.
Only if you decide to spend all your time in an NPC corp previously, which is not a good idea if you want to stay in the game long term.
In effect Upwell Structures are needed for more advanced play, like changing seamlessly into a better mission clone, doing indy. There is a value and you move to a more serious committed play by using them.
There are many bad CEO’s however can you honestly say that the wrong decision for them being so out gunned and out skilled was to not log in at all.
There are good reasons to have structures, I think there will be enough that want structures, however I am not so sure that structures will survive long going forward.
Me too, but I play to be hard to kill and to me the structures are too easy…
I don’t think there should be a suspect flag for that.
I think it is fine as it is, however I would suggest creating a limited type of war dec possibility for entities that do not have a structure with limitations that do not make it a total drag for the defender.
You weren’t doing highsec wardecs at the time… what you think, aka your opinion, is totally oblivios and irrelevant to that fact that all the hunter groups went bye bye with the watchlist.
Your posts reek of absolute ignorance when it comes to wardecs, you speak of it like you were in one of the many hunting corps, yet you weren’t even close to any of it
Why are you trying to engage with someone who you falsely accused of harassment. You are stalking me and I ask you again to stop. There is no discussion or debate with you, all you want to do is point score and I have no respect or interest in anything you think or say.
I have always said that I was not a war decker, that you keep telling me something that I always said I was not, says everything about you and your need to score senseless inane points.
I’m simply pointing out that you’re wrong once again
Go cry to Falcon how I’m destroying your non-existing arguments
I am not a war decker, I joined the war dec discord as someone who spent a lot of time analysing war deckers and with a viewpoint on the defenders, I told the people there including yourself that was what I was and what I get back is:
I would like you to go and check how many times I have done the @ CCP falcon on you, which is zero and you have done that to me at least four times. The last one was a desperate attempt to get me a forum ban.
How many times do I have to tell you that I am not a war decker for it to sink in and to keep telling me that I am not a war decker is just really odd. So if that is the pinnacle of your argument then… Well what can I say, I am not a war decker, I never have been and I have never claimed to be a war decker.
PS Falcon suggested that we shoot each other in game, I am in Khafis, feel free.
Feel free to sub me
So what that “war eligibility” description is? Links on news article are broken - https://support.eveonline.com/hc/en-us/articles/115004152745-Wars
I have no structures yet and i want to declare a war - what is the cheapest way to do it for me? What structure i need to deploy - mobile depot? Maybe secure container?
From the article in the OP:
Structures that count for war eligibility are:
- All Upwell Structures (including Upwell FLEX structures)
- Starbase Control Towers
- Player-owned Customs Offices
- Sovereignty Structures (Infrastructure Hubs and Territorial Control Units)
If you can find an unclaimed planet, Player Owned Customs Office (POCO) may be your cheapest option. If you can find an unclaimed moon, a small control tower. After that, a Raitaru engineering complex is probably the least expensive option.
If you are unable to afford any of these, contact me with an in game mail and I will see if I can point you towards some additional assistance.
If planet has a POCO - it is claimed planet but how do you claim moon? It is claimed with athanor refinery or control tower nearby?
There’s a one control tower per moon limit. If there is already a control tower at that moon, you will be unable to place your own until it is destroyed or unanchored by the owner. Athanors do not count. An Athanor can be placed at the moon mining beacon and coexist with a control tower, even if the owners are totally separate (or hostile to one another).
I don’t mind at all the new wardec system. I do mind however that as a corp that likes to dec others you only have to get a small tower for like 100m, anchor it somewhere far off and no need to have it online.
I think the requirement shouldn’t be just having a structure in space, it should be an ONLINE structure in space.
If you get decced and you decide to clear out the fuel of the tower to avoid the dec then bad luck, it has a week or maybe 2 cooldown period in which the wardec goes through as intended.
If you want to dec you have to make sure your tower is online aswel. If you decide to remove the fuel your cooldown period in which your wardecs are active is much shorter since you don’t intend to put too much effort into keeping your dec’s alive. You then have 2 days left to fight in your wars and when you want to restart your tower you get either a cooldown period in which you can’t dec or a period in which you cant take the tower offline.
Risk vs Reward should work both ways, not just in favor of certain playstyles.
If there are any groups taking advantage of the wardec imbalance you suggest exists to get wealthy without putting themselves at risk, I’d like to hear about them. A few concrete examples of wardeccing groups running rampant without online structures would greatly assist in proving your point.
So you can pull the fuel to cancel a wardec and save your structures… And no one can wardec to.clean offline structures up.
That or the wardec is already a week long so it makes no difference.
Which means it’s not worth making a distinction because it’s the same length either way.
Nope, the thing is that if you get wardecced that as soon as the wardec is in effect the wardec will last 2 weeks minimal even if the corp that got decced pulls all fuel.
If you can’t kill off an offline stucture in 2 weeks you lack in many ways.
As a wardeccer yourself you should have atleast an online tower so anchoring a tower somewhere in wife off Minmatar space and then head on over a load of jumps to caldari space is also kinda in favor of the wardeccers, isn’t it?
Because production, engineering, mining corps put their towers and structures up to where their base of activity is.
A deccer can easy obtain the base of operations and eventual range of operations where as a corp that get’s decced will have thousands of systems to scan down to hopefully find an anchored structure of the wardeccer.
Thus is the current setup of the wardec system in great favor again of the agressors.
If CCP would give locator agents also the option to find locations of targets online structures the playingfield would be a tad less in favor of the agressors and the “carebears” would be able to maybe form up and go after the structure of the agressor aswel.
Since it is high sec I am mainly talking about I would reckon that Concord and also the Empires themselves would have an outstanding registration of all structures in their collective space.
The new wardec system wont allow you to wardec without having a structure in space.
However you can set it up in some backwater system in any empire without it having to be online and then move your agression to a whole other empire.
Whereas a production, research or mining corp tends to have their structure online if they intend to use it as base of operation. They most likely also be playing in said system or atleast in the neighbourhood of said system.
So where is the risk vs reward for both parties?
As agressive corp who wants to put out as many wardecs as they feel there is not really much risk. Nor is there much work because they only have to anchor a small tower a load of jumps away to be able to wardec.
The chance their tower get’s probed down is virtually nill since their intended victims are 20+ jumps away, so howmuch chance is there to get their tower spotted?
As I already said, there should also be some risk for the wardeccers.
Since I can use a locator agent to find a pilots location then why can’t I also find atleast the system in which their corp has a structure in space?
This opens up the possebility that a group of “carebears” fleets up to try to bring the fight to the agressors front door.
Or if they are totally not into shooting stuff but good at making ISK they could hire in another group to do the structure shooting.
This would certainly decrease the number of rampant wardecs with totally no kills and also open up the risk vs reward for both parties to a more extensive level.
If pulling fuel under your proposal a war would still last 2 weeks, then it’s pointless having it care about a structure being fueled or not. Since a war only lasts a week till it needs renewal anyway.
Also how will you kill offline structures if you can’t wardec the corp holding them.
You are adding in complications that give no benefit to the system and add a whole lot of work arounds needed.
Actually you prove my point.
If a corp has an active tower and decides to pull the fuel from the tower there is no need to renew the wardec after one week. There is automaticly a week added due to pulling the fuel.
Add to that the option to use locator agents to find in which system(s) a corp has structures in space just like you can find pilots locations and there willl be a lot more active wars than the thousands in which not a single ISK get’s lost due to destruction.
If you use the locator agent system for structures aswel then you could remove the whole not war eligeable system.
But as the system is atm it’s hugely in favor of a certain playstyle and the risk vs reward isn’t even on the same table.