this could negatively impact siege on an enemy system, or having an enemy neighbor. The having the most uneven contestation mechanic working either too much in favor or against one side.
I don’t know what a half a day siege would be like, but it would be awful to lose a system on a holiday or while spending the day at the beach.
On a similar line, changing payout of dplexing multiplies the possible scenarios and code work. Simply adding a variable that if the plex is taken defensively, the value of the 75% should be off-balanced and the difference against the full value be donated towards the corresponding iHub automatically. For example in a tier 2 home system at 10% with a Small plex we could see the following at work: [17500 * 10% * 75%] dplex check + (17500 - 1312). Payout remains the same, but the difference of the 16188 that is lost goes to the ihub, therefore rewarding those who dplex for the sake of it while keeping dplexing income to a minimum.
I have heard complaints about the sec hits and suffered them myself. I finally stopped complaining and just tagged myself back below -5 when I had need to. This could also apply to shooting pies or suspects in highsec for an even greater return and some opportunities for RP’ers.
Literally THE reason I took a break recently. Citadels ruined warzone system contestation. It became meaningless and only a factor when it came to LP farming or manipulation. The common misconception here is that they require vulnerability windows the same as their null sec counterparts. If you give FW areas a restriction to citadel anchoring, you need to understand it cannot work. Systems flip all the time and people would lose access to their own citadels. This would be just aggravating to a new level, both to neutrals and to militia pilots. Long ago I suggested that the citadel itself should be deployable as a special FW specific structure where found within the warzone; the citadel should deploy over the iHub and, in effect, become the iHub structure and becomes vulnerable by the same means, when the system reaches 100%. Therefore only one is available and present in any system. You can imagine the content this opens up. I really loved the idea, but it just didn’t catch fire with anyone. Citadels need work. Until then, this is the state of the WZ and FW. This would, no doubt, be an excellent motivator for group content, as citadels would be owned by corporation and therefore the system be identified by its citadel owner.
That’s it for now. I wont touch upon too much pve content.