Great to see some smart changes to what was effectively a tool for mass suicide ganking without the suicide in highsec. One possible change: consider granting a defending corp in a war a 2-3 week immunity from all wardecs if they ‘win’ the war by killing the War HQ. That gives many highsec carebear corps a real incentive to fight back. Of course, that immunity disappears if the corp itself declares war.
1 Like
Looks good. I like the war HQ thingy, gives the defender a reason to go into the offensive and have an actual benefit for fighting back.
A nice idea in principle, but supremely exploitable with an alt corp I’m afraid.
6 Likes
With regards to the war dec UI overhaul: Please make it possible to drag a war from the actual war overview window. Oftentimes that huge war window hides my show info windows and that makes it harder to drag a specific war into a chat. It would be nice if you could click on the crossed swords in the war window and drag the war link into chats, mails, notes, whatnot.
And could bug fixes please also included that every kill I participated in generating is now counted in the war report and not just final blows? That would be very great. Although I can already see spaghetti code get in the way of that because a kill cannot be on 2 or more war reports simultaneously. 
Counterpoint, allowing War HQs in high sec islands would bring a lot more activity to places like Solitude and the null sec travel pipes would be a sure fire conflict driver of merc corps trying to assault these regions.
1 Like
and my sugestion ist stop mining afk in your belts! if you have enough mining power you simply mine the bad guy the roid away under his drones/lasers and call it done. you can even bump them or talk with them and as seen often in highsec they just give you a fee from the mined value.
**the problem with highsec moonmining are NOT the active players who “steal” from others. gater intel where are belts whan up and bring in ther fleets. **
the problem are the risk averse afk mining orcas who call all in these belts “my ore” and want suspect flag and protection from active players!
5 Likes
If you have to kill the structure to get that, then you’re talking about the price of the wardec (100M) + the price of the structure, for 3 weeks of war immunity, broken up by windows of roughly 1 week (War dec has to happen, then defender has to RF structure, then kill it) of war eligibility.
Honestly, managing that seems like more of a PITA than something people will exploit. Especially if you use the 2-week immunity option.
1 Like
Or I could drop an expensive structure after becoming immune from my alt corp to make sure it anchors without anybody being able to hit it while onlining
In terms of regular-ass asteroid belts, sure. No one has an inherent claim to them. Moons, on the other hand, are territory claimed by a specific group and their facilities are also a recurring cost. Conquest and infrastructure of this type should confer at least superficially exclusive rights to the resource, if the proper amount of force is brought to bear to ensure it. In highsec, though, you can waddle up to anyone’s moon and suck their crok out from under their noses, and aside from bumping, they have little recourse.
Have you met EVE players? 
7 Likes
It’d bring a lot more activity to the gatecamping nyxes in the lowsec border systems, that’s for damn sure. The idea behind disallowing islands is to prevent a scenario where a highsec wardeccer can hide behind supercapitals.
Hi, I’m a member of the Goonswarm directorate, and I dunno, I think GSOL’s Tuzy would look at that and go ‘Not worth the paperwork.’
1 Like
JF ships next door. Assemble in high sec. Supers avoided
This seems like an easy win, we’ll see what we can do, thanks!
Hmmm, not sure how hard that one will be, but we’ll take a look.
5 Likes
Congratulations, you’ve raised the bar for defenders in a wardec to “must own JF.”
And you’ve raised the bar for attackers to “must own Supers”
The attackers can choose to not put their war hq in a highsec island if they have no supers to bring to bear.
The only reason for Corporations that cannot be war dec is for us to be able to share assets between characters and accounts.
This has not only been ignored; it has been circumvented via an extremely time-consuming effort put into the new war dec Corporations feature that was implemented.
CSM’s 1 and All may be the only way to get this resolved.
This would also make it easier for those of us who are running multiple accounts at once; which is also why we need the new 64 Bit version of the game as well
And since we are willing to pay for 2 accounts to run Omega we Need to be the ones at the top of the give a ■■■■ list!
Instead of begging for Skins money just make us Loyal Omega account runners happy.
Thanks for the response. I agree there isn’t a clear and simple solution. The best I can think of atm, and thinking and chatting on the Wardec Project, is to change the ally-in/assist in war option.
If it allows the attacker and defender to hire or recruit allies into a war, that war as an entity is still treated as War of A vs B, but C is allowed to offer assistance to B and A becomes a valid War target to C as well. I think this option allowing the war to be treated as one group can be changed to fall under similar mechanics as FW with some moderate changes. Under that system, if A and C declare separate wars on B, they are neutral to each other and cannot assist, as with now. However if they become allowed to ally-in or assist both offensive and defensive wars, they could be allowed to fall under the war as a joint target, since those mechanics have depended on the validity of the original war (i.e. the original declaration becomes invalid and all assistances to simultaneously).
I would love to hear some thoughts on that as a sensible solution for the future, though I understand it certainly would not be involved in the changes coming in the next couple of months. @CCP_Lebowski
1 Like
IChooseYou would be all over this for 2-3 weeks invulnerability for his hisec markets.
1 Like