“holding corps” allow the majority of the members to access trade hubs without the wardec campers getting free kills on them.
The entire reason that holding corps were allowed was to stop wardec campers from punching down on smaller corps and solo player corps.
The war-dec system was made opt-in for a reason. Why should a small group opt-in unless they want to willfully fight, 24/7 with no safe/re-ship areas, against those war-dec groups when they can get much more fair fights against lowsec, nullsec, and wormhole groups and when they choose to?
It’s a rhetorical question, as the answer is that they would not. While I understand how the war-dec revamp overly neutered the system, the majority of those who want the system fully intend to use it as a mechanism for one-sided slaughter in their favor— not a war, not a fight, just a one-sided griefing mechanism for their entertainment. Those players have clearly demonstrated how much respect they have for others over the years, and this is the solution that they deserve.
I don’t understand your complaint. If you own a structure under the banner of a holding corporation, you’re war elligible and have already opted in, allowing people to ‘punch down’ on those structures. My post is about how to make structures live longer.
The method worked for me. I would also like to add that I could go to and from Jita just fine during war or burn events. Showing you have some grasp of how to handle yourself during war by flaunting a shopping trip is an excellent way to make wardeccers turn their attention to some other corporation that won’t bother to teach their members how to handle themselves during a war, or that just flat doesn’t have any real members because it’s a holding corp.
Let’s remeber the original war dec system, with no safety net, and the large groups would have a 15-20 man group, with multiple other out-of-corp support characters, would hell camp jita/amarr undock and certain popular stargates somewhat near those trade hubs. They would spend all day ganking newbies in imicus’s and tristans, and had high speed out-of-corp bumpers to chase down DSTs that thought they would be safe with an insta-undock warp point and jump through a gate, just to get bumped near indefinately as multiple ships followed behind and dogpiled onto them. The fact that you have not run into these highly skilled griefers, or exclusively use cloaky ships in trade hub areas, more of shows how those pilots moved onto other endeavors than any other sort of metric – including the skill of the target (you, in this case) against them.
The CEO burning a multi-training token to have a 2nd char learn some corp skills and anchoring skills in order to make a 1-man corp that owns the station means that all of the meaningful war from the war-dec is opt in if the corp wants to.
This is especially helpful for lowsec and WH groups that exclusively use high sec only when traveling to and from a trade hub. The only other option was to drop corp and spend a week in an NPC corp (after 24 hours) while the war dec ends in order to continue playing the game, and then rejoin. Which is painful.
I’m not telling people what they can or can’t do, or what they should or shouldn’t do if they want. What I am saying is that a holding corp makes it seem a structure is an easy target when someone spots it and people shouldn’t be surprised if another corporation decides to test its defenses. This is a topic about hisec ganking nerfs and how HS structures are ‘risk free’ to kill, so I think we can rule out the suggestion I’m refering to structures, in a holding corp or otherwise, in lowsec or wormholes.
I don’t personally think the old system was that bad. I was able to live with it, but that’s neither here nor there. The claim I was responding to is that blowing up HS strutures in holding corps was ‘risk free’. I’m saying people are advertising they are risk averse, then doing nothing to defend those structures. No reasonable person would expect a structure to survive an attack under those circumstances, including any attackers who are reasonable people making future plans about which targets to attack.
Even still, I’m not saying people can’t (or shouldn’t) anchor whatever they want wherever and whenever the game will permit, but they must accept that it is a risk, and accept the concequences (including loss) of anchoring it where and under what circumstances they did. If a structure owner wants taking down their structure to be a risky endeavor, then the onus is on the owner to create that risk.
If you’ll notice, this pattern occurs every year. If you use the tear-end slide to project future numbers, you’ll be wrong everytime. With that being said, what IS worrisome is the almost 10k drop from Jan '22 to Jan '23.
I agree that structure ownership is non-trivial, and may be more of an aspirational goal for some small groups, but it is not impossible to attain and I don’t think anyone absolutely needs a structure in highsec when an NPC station offers the same services without a fueling requirement.
However, I suppose my point of view is that of someone who owned structures for amusement. For me, they were just money pits and I paid to enjoy watching people use them. Their maintenance also gave my corp members something to do to ‘contribute to the corp’ that they could see the effects of. Most of us did a fair bit of mining so we’d mine ice to make the fuel when there was nothing better to do. I did not expect them to be useful to me or profitable so I would not really understand the point of view of someone owning them for practical purposes or financial gain.
There were only 5 of us, tops, and we had lots of structures in high and a few in low. We did lose some of them here and there, and had a few scares, but loss is also a chance to pull together to recover. A corporation’s most valuable asset is its members. Choose them wisely, support them when they need you to, and they will achieve great things for your organization.
I keep trying to offer assistance to people but most must think it is some sort of scam. So unfortunately we cannot get involved in these high sec wars. If they just made every war dec turn the aggressor into a target for everyone, it would fix everything right there. The offer assistance system needs to go away.
Ya i get the system used to be really bad, but i think this is further proof it needs a little bit of a tweak. Right now the fact that SRS got on the year end video is proof that it needs to change. A highly motivated null sec alliance can easily go into high sec and use those null sec resources to destroy the game for new players. If they wage war in their alt corps like SRS they need to be targets of everyone in high sec. Along with their structures. Waging war should be short and sweet not prolonged and abusive. No need to feed the sociopaths.
I know what you mean, I just made a post in some other thread.
What about a one war limit on people without structures that can only war dec someone who is already at war, it could be linked to any wars they have but it would drop if they dropped their wars
We often find people being attacked like you said think your assistance is a scam and just don’t trust you or they don’t want to antagonist their attacker any more.
If you want to chat more about wars look me up in game there must be hundreds of small groups like yours that want to fight in high or help people in wars