# Forsaken Fortress – Coming 26 May **URL:** \ **Category:** Dev Blogs\ **Created:** [April 24, 2020, 4:15pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219 "2020-04-24T16:15:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 25
**Author:** ![Niriam\_DoT](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/niriam_dot/32/283318_2.png) [@Niriam\_DoT](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Niriam_DoT)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 9:01am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219/491 "2020-04-26T09:01:51Z")
Regarding the people, who are already not able to login and won’t be able to do so until the patch day (a lot of mentions of military people regarding this) - CCP should just force all the assets on the structures at the moment of patch to asset safety, that’s it. ---
**Author:** ![Nevyn\_Auscent](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/nevyn_auscent/32/255124_2.png) [@Nevyn\_Auscent](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Nevyn_Auscent)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 9:04am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219/492 "2020-04-26T09:04:37Z")
> [@Niriam\_DoT](#): > > CCP should just force all the assets on the structures at the moment of patch to asset safety, that’s it. I assume you mean of inactive players. Why should an active player have to go through the issues if they don’t want to. But of inactive players yes. @CCP_Aurora ---
**Author:** ![Niriam\_DoT](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/niriam_dot/32/283318_2.png) [@Niriam\_DoT](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Niriam_DoT)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 9:06am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219/493 "2020-04-26T09:06:21Z")
> [@Nevyn\_Auscent](#): > > Why should an active player have to go through the issues if they don’t want to. Cuz nullblocks must suffer 😃 But I’ll admit, your proposal has a point in it ---
**Author:** ![twoflower\_Secret](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/twoflower_secret/32/361686_2.png) [@twoflower\_Secret](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/twoflower_Secret)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 9:51am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219/494 "2020-04-26T09:51:38Z")
I agree it’s a nice sink (for players and corporations with deep pockets). But it might obstruct corporation creation as corporate hangars are essential to sharing resources and usage of blueprints amongst members. ---
**Author:** ![twoflower\_Secret](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/twoflower_secret/32/361686_2.png) [@twoflower\_Secret](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/twoflower_Secret)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 9:53am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219/495 "2020-04-26T09:53:14Z")
And I forgot to mention: corporate hangars are tied to the ability to lock blueprints by voting, which is one of the measures to counter in-game theft. ---
**Author:** ![Stephan\_X\_Janau](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/stephan_x_janau/32/272899_2.png) [@Stephan\_X\_Janau](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Stephan_X_Janau)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 10:10am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219/496 "2020-04-26T10:10:18Z")
If a toon cannot afford to keep a huge structure fueled . their business model was sketchy in the first place and should go back to the drawing board. … USE IT OR LOSE IT. ---
**Author:** ![Ms\_Steak](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/ms_steak/32/168834_2.png) [@Ms\_Steak](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Ms_Steak)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 10:33am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219/497 "2020-04-26T10:33:59Z")
> [@Nevyn\_Auscent](#): > > But of inactive players yes. Define “inactive”. Any blanket action on this will have negative consequences. ---
**Author:** ![Runa\_Yamaguchi](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/runa_yamaguchi/32/197532_2.png) [@Runa\_Yamaguchi](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Runa_Yamaguchi)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 10:34am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219/498 "2020-04-26T10:34:24Z")
No you can’t just have free stuff… ---
**Author:** ![Nevyn\_Auscent](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/nevyn_auscent/32/255124_2.png) [@Nevyn\_Auscent](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Nevyn_Auscent)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 10:37am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219/499 "2020-04-26T10:37:32Z")
> [@Ms\_Steak](#): > > Define “inactive”. Any blanket action on this will have negative consequences. I would imagine CCP would use the same definition they already do. I think it is 3 months no logins. Or they could use not logged in since the Dev blog. Sure it might have one or two negative issues, but vs how many long term inactive could lose stuff they believed 100% safe due to asset safety, seems less drama that way. ---
**Author:** ![Litsea\_Reticulata](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/litsea_reticulata/32/328016_2.png) [@Litsea\_Reticulata](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Litsea_Reticulata)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 11:07am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219/500 "2020-04-26T11:07:56Z")
> [@Kilei\_Torsc](#): > > But not all the time. As an example, someone else already pointed out a lot of smaller corporations will online their stations maybe once a month to run refining for their months haul of ore and that’s it. Its important to understand its part of the ‘identity’ issue with corporations that they want to to do everything under their banner. Structure here, structure there. Structure spam everywhere. This kind of change only punishes those who’s abilities have exceeded their aspirations. Really, fuelling a citadel is effortless compared to the first iteration of POS’s and still a breeze compared to them just before to switchover to citadels when the maximum amount of fuel they could hold was about a month. > [@Albert\_Spear](#): > > If you are worth billions, yes. If you are a small corp of RL friends who have been playing for 5-6 months - then no, they are not cheap. Citadels are too cheap, that should have been apparent when they started getting spammed in systems to troll the occupants. > [@YellowRaven](#): > > no it usually is one man 8 accounts alliance Sadly, this is quite often true. > [@Othello\_Warspite](#): > > At worst, it will expose some gaps in structure roles currently. I recall a structure I use going into low power, and someone who had the ability to fuel it not having the rights to online modules, and the solution was that someone needed almost full control to restart it. If that wasn’t a corp-specific issue (always possible), then there is perhaps work to be done alongside this patch. I mean, if I’m trusting someone to fuel a structure, I may not want him to be able to remove the modules, but I think I’d trust them to flip a light switch. Absolutely. This is an opportunity to do some QOL changes. One of the most frustrating aspects of citadels is the archaic nature of corporation roles. > [@Othello\_Warspite](#): > > Short version: make sure there’s a role for trusted people to fuel and flip the light switch without having the rights to remodel the place, and it’s fine. Really. Roles/configurations that allow fuel to be added, but not the contents of the fuel bay be viewed/stolen would be perfect. > [@Stevens](#): > > So your answer is either, don’t get hit by a car or don’t use citadels. Great game mechanics 10/10 solid plan. & > [@Jerry\_Falcone](#): > > Did i say either one? No. Unfortunate situations happen. But having plans in place, for some unfortunate event like getting laid off unexpectedly or getting put in jail, having a back up plan for some rare occurance is better than not having any kind of plan at all. If a corporation doesn’t have a reliable CEO and two directors with enough shares to take over their boots in an emergency, find a different corporation that can actually organise the above. That’s another great reason citadels open up the gates to war declarations, people need to be in place before plonking down structures, as exemplified… > [@Alesis\_Wicked](#): > > Corp level asets should be used by corps. if said corp cant afford 500mil raitaru, they shouldn’t be dropping said raitaru and there is no problem. So not sure what your point is. Exactly right. Real corporations, bums on seats, not one human with their 25 man bot herd. > [@Arrendis](#): > > Really, this idea that you can make someone else’s stager impenetrable _to them_ is just… ridiculous. Even before citadels using BLOPS to get fuel into POS’s was a thing. Annoying to have to do, but if a group doesn’t have a good mount of BLOPS pilots and haulers (not T1 garbage ) again, there’s an indication one is too short to get on the citadel ride. > [@darkestkhan\_Eriker](#): > > Is needed - at last people can start cleaning up abandoned structures, and possibly get something back from doing so. This is sorely needed, after all weren’t the drifter invasions supposed to clean this junk up before they overloaded the cluster? > [@Arrendis](#): > > What about them? They’re not upwell structures, they work on different mechanics. Perhaps the question is, why don’t they need to be fuelled when everything else will to get a reinforcement timer? > [@CCP\_Aurora](#): > > Poco mechanics should be unchanged by this update. While a POCO isn’t a Citadel, why isn’t it a good time to talk about bringing them in line with everything else? POCO’s don’t eve need strontium in them like POS’s used to. They cost nothing and spew out a massive amount of passive income. > [@MyLoudVoice](#): > > The nice thing about this that the rich players will for once pay a fair tax. And it will probably be huge sink. Fair enough to pay a tax for asset safety, though it shouldn’t make citadel spam harder to get rid of. > [@Algathas](#): > > Simple: Keep enough fuel in your structure for X months at a minimum. So say your estimate is 6 months of being out due to being scared of a car accident. Then put 9 months of fuel in and when it hits 6 months refuel it to 9, repeat every 3 months. You then always have a 6 month emergency buffer of fuel and get all the benefits of asset safety if you are not using your structure for that long. In the area I used to live in 0.0 had some people who couldn’t be bothered to fuel their POS’s. One dropped 27 billion, it was sad to see so much stuff destroyed just because they were too lazy to bring in or manufacture blocks. > [@MyLoudVoice](#): > > Having one will probably get you 100% wardecced. Step into that ring, expect to get knocked out. > [@Gabberflasted](#): > > What about the alliances/corporations that have invested billions of isk over the last few months putting up moon drills? Now they have no time to wait and see how the moon mining changes pan out before either fueling or taking down structures. The only real choice is to potentially waste billions more isk fueling stations that may or may not be profitable. They were never profitable, it was always an ISK sink. > [@Nevyn\_Auscent](#): > > I’m on a phone so can’t check. What’s the cheapest module to run. Moon drill is the cheapest module to run at like 5 blocks an hour. > [@Sullen\_Decimus](#): > > With this change, many people will avoid anything but stations because why risk your assets? Haven’t used a citadel to store anything for more than a few days since they came out. > [@Sullen\_Decimus](#): > > Most of the people I know who dump the largest amount of real money into this game are military personnel who go on deployments for 6 months or more. Are we just saying screw you guys? Does this make it hard for people in 0.0? Yes. Is this a new problem? No. The problem isn’t the change in the mechanic, the real change here is now in 0.0 you have to trust someone to keep your stuff safe and not take advantage of you. What wormhole group lost a factional fortizar a few months ago unachoring it? The story was that every few months they would pull the citadel down and ‘liberate’ its contents. With the abandonment mechanic, the calculated theft in a wormhole now becomes possible in regular space. That’s probably what most are really going to have to be worried about, having their stuff nicked by the person next to them. Classic Eve. > [@Angela\_Belvar](#): > > This is what kicking over castles should have been. Good job finally making a good decision! Not quite there, time zone tanking is still a problem. > [@Algathas](#): > > They can move their stuff, asset safety, etc and their belongings will be safe if they don’t trust the structure owner. Well, sometimes there are crash postings were you don’t have that luxury. In my old 0.0 corporation this happened a lot for our Navy guys. At least in the old days stuff in a POS maintenance bay or corporate hangar could be moved out for them. Personal hangars just resulted in stuff being lost, so we never anchored them on a POS anyway. > [@Algathas](#): > > Maybe don’t be an idiot who keeps tons of assets in structures run by people you don’t trust to keep it fueled? Ding! > [@MB\_ThePhotographer](#): > > I understand your point, but I think it could be abused. You would only have to fuel it once a month. Which is exactly why 7 days is better than a month. If an Eve player doesn’t have to do something, they won’t do it. > [@Faylee\_Freir](#): > > Yes, CCP Aurora posted on Reddit that May 2nd is “D-Day” Oh for crying out loud, its like CCP doesn’t have their own forum to interact with the player base anymore. > [@Sgt\_Ocker](#): > > I’m stuck in the middle of outback Australia due to Covid 19 with patchy 3g internet and no computer. Just between you and me, Its something we can plainly see, The NBN, its true you see, Smells like poo and tastes like wee! > [@darkestkhan\_Eriker](#): > > You wouldn’t assume assets inside pos are there months after you have gone afk… Actually, one veteran left their paladin in a POS, assuming nobody would take it. > [@Nicolai\_Serkanner](#): > > Good riddance. CCP haven’t given those of us on the wrong end of the internet lottery much love. You’d probably quit too if each action took half a second to get to the server and back. > [@Charlotte\_RoseHeart](#): > > Maybe next they will do something about the mobile depot spam in Jita and spreading to the surrounding systems. Yes please, its surprising these haven’t been already dealt with as a performance issue. > [@Far\_Wanderer](#): > > If there’s an Abandoned phase, can there be a subsequent Take Over phase? These things are spam to be destroyed, not repackaged under another label. > [@Brezzin\_Tor](#): > > What’m I missing here? People want to be lazy and structures are a ISK sink they don’t want to pay for. > [@Ben\_Hatton](#): > > Additionally, given that asset safety was a fundamental feature of structures on release, it is absolutely critical an email from CCP should be sent to all existing and post 2015 players letting them know of this change. CCP already reneged on citadels retaining rigs if unanchored and redopyled in the same system. The jump gates are missing the EMP effect to stun campers. Compression and Reprocessing aren’t separate services. Jump gates are now pushed outside the range of weapons batteries. Citadels themselves now can’t be anchored within 500 km of a gate. Tethering got changed to add an unnecessary inconvenience of having to dock right after jumping in, solely to placate a niche gameplay. Observatories! Observatories! Observatories! Tsk, tsk tsk for shame! > [@Agrikaan](#): > > Fueling would be less of an issue if it just wasn’t so expensive, especially for those structures not currently serving a function, but will again in the future. So expensive? Without trying to sound like an old fart, when I had to deal with POS’s fuel was almost a billion a month for a large tower. Citadels are so much cheaper… > [@Arrendis](#): > > Among other things, the fact that a fair number of the ‘Thank you CCP, this is a step in the right direction’ posts are from nullsec players. I’m not Null, but thank you anyway. > [@cpu939](#): > > No Tethering - i like this change but i don’t think it goes far enough i’d like to see tethering removed for low power structrues too or better yet make tethering a service mod if need be add a service slot for it. Hey, citadels have like 3 service module slots, its seems silly that 90% of them only use one module. > [@Kane\_Adestur](#): > > Wasn’t the asset safety introduced to encourage the usage of player owned markets and structures? No, extortionate taxes in NPC station were introduced to encourage the use of player owned markets and structures. > [@Hoshi](#): > > Now if you can get a spy into position to transfer said Keepstar at the right moment it’s a different thing altogether but that’s not going to happen very often. CCP, Make structures controllable by the same political mechanism as blueprints and assets! > [@Nasar\_Vyron](#): > > Next step is to reduce the cap on the fuel bay itself and create a burn rate penalty on structures within a system with a hostile ADM. This way you create a second avenue of attack both during and after a war has taken place. The counter to this is who is hostile, and who is a renter structure? Personally, punish structures that don’t fly the same flag as the TCU as hard as possible. > [@Nasar\_Vyron](#): > > Wall of meaningless text over! The old system was like that, subsystems on 0.0 stations could be individually targeted, just nobody ever bothered. > [@Zhalyd\_Lyehin](#): > > In contrast to structures, you were able to incapacitate POS defenses so that you could attack it with fewer people later on. Oh the hours spent dropping bombs on a POS to incapacitate the guns… > [@Circumstantial\_Evidence](#): > > Citadels are like ships that don’t move: ships don’t have a concept of assigning or sharing their guns or drones among multiple players. Would be nice. Would be nice if they shot at valid targets in an automated fashion. > [@Nevyn\_Auscent](#): > > Considering I already explained some of it, and you just pretended my comments didn’t exist, I’m not playing your game, I’m just going to sit in the corner and play the worlds tiniest violin for your crying over moon fields not giving a perfect balance of minerals for production now. What is wrong with you? Arrendis is in 0.0, its not like there’s a shortage of places to mine. > [@Circumstantial\_Evidence](#): > > We have to get through a harsh scarcity phase, before the next set of changes is revealed. Until PvP fleets are necessary to protect PvE fleets, the ore starvation should continue. > [@Eve\_ElBlanco](#): > > Some of them however have multibillion rigs and after this “Forsaken Fortress” update a few carriers/dreads can wipe out these structures, in a single run and they can do that in minutes. What are you doing in low security space as a solo industrialist? > [@Eve\_ElBlanco](#): > > And instead of relaxation by playing this game it all will be converted into (more)stress and (more)frustration by losing everything I build in 11 years of EVE….in a few minutes. Relaxing? In low security space as a solo player industrialist your eyes should swivelling around on stalks, every second. > [@Drago\_Shouna](#): > > I really can’t see it being worth it particularly in HS/LS for a one man or small corp. Which is the point of this. > [@Daoden](#): > > Guess what to all the people complaining about losing your stuff, before with the old POS mechanics this is EXACTLY what happened before and people somehow managed to deal with it. So true, and they weren’t spammed everywhere. > [@Daoden](#): > > There was no asset safety even in High sec and it was also alot easier for people to steal from you if you gave them access. Recruiting good people, not press ganging hordes of F1 muppets. > [@AHandinit\_Flo](#): > > Will there be a notification to asset owners when a Citadel goes into abandoned mode? Well, when the citadel enters low power, surely? > [@Sordina1](#): > > And yet, you didn’t learn anything for that whole time and still don’t understand why space trash called structures is issue. Especially in hisec. If you knew who that Aralis was you would know they spent most of their time in Null. Shooting at structures doesn’t need a permit or a war dec, fyi. > [@Lord\_FreezeOn](#): > > I would suggest something more like 10 - 14 days after it hits low power to make it abandoned, give the owners time to scoop their structure. All you have to do is leave the service module running a few more days. Not that hard. > [@Piar\_Stolpien](#): > > They will have no way of knowing if the station they’re using has fuel for a year or a day left. So to be safe, they’ll have to always assume any structure could go abandoned in one week. Maybe establish a relationship with the owner rather than just showing up, eating their food and taking a dump before leaving? > [@Elwha\_Lynx](#): > > The real question is why would someone put stuff of value in a structure owned by a group they don’t trust to take care of it or give warning. Freeloaders. > [@twoflower\_Secret](#): > > But it might obstruct corporation creation as corporate hangars are essential to sharing resources and usage of blueprints amongst members. These can still be purchased at NPC stations. ---
**Author:** ![Runa\_Yamaguchi](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/runa_yamaguchi/32/197532_2.png) [@Runa\_Yamaguchi](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Runa_Yamaguchi)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 11:12am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219/501 "2020-04-26T11:12:51Z")
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Holy ■■■■ what a reply ---
**Author:** ![Circumstantial\_Evidence](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/circumstantial_evidence/32/399551_2.png) [@Circumstantial\_Evidence](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Circumstantial_Evidence)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 11:25am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219/502 "2020-04-26T11:25:59Z")
> [@Circumstantial\_Evidence](#): > > Citadels are like ships that don’t move: ships don’t have a concept of assigning or sharing their guns or drones among multiple players. Would be nice. > [@Litsea Reticulata](#): > > Would be nice if they shot at valid targets in an automated fashion. The old POS code which did this was capricious and buggy, occasionally shooting friendly targets. The settings to define what to shoot at, were confusing to some people. While it could have been rewritten from the ground up with ACL’s in mind, CCP’s goal with new structures was to simplify the system for us, and them. No Ai headaches, and a player-set RF timer, so you could have at least one chance to be there and shoot back. ---
**Author:** ![Kane\_Adestur](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/kane_adestur/32/512293_2.png) [@Kane\_Adestur](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Kane_Adestur)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 12:04pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219/503 "2020-04-26T12:04:56Z")
What I don’t understand: Why not remove asset safety completely then? The effort involved in destroying a fueled and defended structure is so much higher. Why allow the defenders to get perfect asset safety for some cheap fuel? Winner should take it all, right? ---
**Author:** ![Zappity](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/zappity/32/502632_2.png) [@Zappity](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Zappity)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 12:11pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219/504 "2020-04-26T12:11:22Z")
I don’t understand all these posts saying that seven days is too short. Can’t you put months of fuel in structures? ---
**Author:** ![Syzygium](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/syzygium/32/516281_2.png) [@Syzygium](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Syzygium)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 12:13pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219/505 "2020-04-26T12:13:53Z")
While they are at it: Make Mobile Depots “abandoned” after 24 or 48 or 72hrs. After that, no timer to kill them. Would help to get rid of this horrible Depot Spam in HS. ---
**Author:** ![Ms\_Steak](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/ms_steak/32/168834_2.png) [@Ms\_Steak](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Ms_Steak)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 12:16pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219/506 "2020-04-26T12:16:22Z")
> [@Zappity](#): > > Can’t you put months of fuel in structures? they are poor/stingy and dont want to keep them fueled all the time. ---
**Author:** ![Nevyn\_Auscent](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/nevyn_auscent/32/255124_2.png) [@Nevyn\_Auscent](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Nevyn_Auscent)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 12:35pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219/507 "2020-04-26T12:35:42Z")
> [@Zappity](#): > > I don’t understand all these posts saying that seven days is too short. Can’t you put months of fuel in structures? Sure, you can. But the point is that at the point it runs out 7 days is too short. It takes 7 days to unanchor a Citadel for example. 7 days is only just longer than the low power reinforcement timer in highsec. Etc. So 14 days is a much more reasonable compromise without meaningfully impacting actually abandoned structures. ---
**Author:** ![Runa\_Yamaguchi](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/runa_yamaguchi/32/197532_2.png) [@Runa\_Yamaguchi](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Runa_Yamaguchi)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 12:38pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219/508 "2020-04-26T12:38:35Z")
> [@Nevyn\_Auscent](#): > > So 14 days is a much more reasonable compromise without meaningfully impacting actually abandoned structures. I’d agree here…7 days does feel short… ---
**Author:** ![Sho\_Riagl\_Khardula](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/sho_riagl_khardula/32/292422_2.png) [@Sho\_Riagl\_Khardula](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Sho_Riagl_Khardula)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 1:12pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219/509 "2020-04-26T13:12:44Z")
> [@Syzygium](#): > > While they are at it: Make Mobile Depots “abandoned” after 24 or 48 or 72hrs. After that, no timer to kill them. Would help to get rid of this horrible Depot Spam in HS. That would be wonderful. My autism also says that _any_ structure that requires anchoring and fuelling should suffer the same mechanics. Further, that in hisec, abandoned structures should have no loot drops and a free-for-all without the need for wardecs (I know, I know). It would keep the space housekeeping simple and likely immediate, if a bit harsh. ---
**Author:** ![Apocriphia](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/apocriphia/32/192323_2.png) [@Apocriphia](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Apocriphia)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 1:17pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219/510 "2020-04-26T13:17:43Z")
perhaps those people should move their stuff to asset safety now, then? Also, I deployed to Kandahar for 6 months last year. I had plenty of time in advance to make adjustments to my stuff in Eve to make sure it was safe no matter what happened in game. And I still managed to log in occasionally or communicate with my corp mates to keep abreast of what was going on. This is really a trivial concern of yours. [Previous page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219.md?page=24) [Next page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/forsaken-fortress-coming-26-may/235219.md?page=26)