Hardly ever happens in Hi-sec wars. And most highsec wars are against small corps. Not enough man power and the large merc groups charge way too much for this to happen.
Only real option here would be to stalk your enemy in a alt and wait for them to be engaged and land on the neutral logi and pay spoiler all with toon not in the current war.
impossible to do while in a ship un-docked so while in pvp na. and they would be prevented to rejoining that first corp for seven days after the move.
Not sure yet if common war defenders can rep each other against the common war attacker. Or common attackers can rep each other against a common defender.
They already do it. They dock up, switch corps, and then yes, they sit in the alt-corp for a week. IT still has the structure theyâre hitting decâd.
believe me if you have a proper mining fleet setup those âthievesâ arent a problem and your âmy propertyâ isst in therms of mining just what you have in your hangar and not wats in the space! thats the whole thing about moonmining changes! you have to be out there mining the roids and nothing jumps in your hangar without any player action. what you mean is you want the isk amout who stands on the drill in your pcet totaly risk free. thats not whats eve about.
and you realy want protection from ccp against other miners? in highsec? realy?
how the â â â â is the War HQ gonna work if you dont got a upwell structure like me i own a custom office in highsec but not an upwell structure so i will no longer be able to attack other but i will be able to be attacked by others ?
So lets say I am in an active war and I suspect bait someone into attacking me. I bring in my logi and they canât help me now because I have a timer with this other guy?
Or the guy that shoots me is in an active war, I canât bring in neutral logi or corp logi because he is in a war and we now have combat timers?
I would like to give my thanks to the CSM and to the developers who helped refine the wardec system. It seems like it will be better for all parties involved in wars.
However, the changes to remote assistance of war participants does have an adverse effect in a particular edge case: group PvE, in hi-sec, with multiple corps where at least one is both at war and has friendly fire enabled. The EVE University Incursion Community falls under this small wedge. E-UNI is often wardecced, has friendly fire enabled, and the community allows members from other corps/alliances to participate. A member in an E-UNI Incursion fleet can accidentally get a capsuleer logoff timer by using an aggressive module on a fellow corp-mate that they might have meant to assign rep bots or cap-chain with. But these changes mean that where before out-of-corp logi could just go suspect to assist that person, they would now lose their ship if they tried to help.
Because of the harsher consequences for neutral assistance, it would be great if an additional safety level were added that prevents a capsuleer from doing an action that would give them a capsuleer logoff timer. That way, members can individually toggle their safeties if/when they want or donât want to be able to friendly fire, rather than that change only being doable on a corp-wide level. I think it would improve on the safety system and its general purpose of preventing people from accidentally getting consequential timers that they might not have wanted to get.
Is it worth even putting a cost to the war declaration?
In the grand scheme of things, you are insisting that these groups require a 400m-200bn isk structure to even declare the war.
What this does is put a barrier to profitability to war declarations, as the loot dropped from your average structure is probably less than the cost of declaring the war in the first place.
If your goal is to encourage more wars and PVP, then make it 10m per week, not 100m.
