PROPOSAL – Localized and Transparent High Sec War Declarations
Over the years, the war declaration system has changed multiple times, and I’m not fully convinced that the current version achieves the right balance between conflict, player freedom and accessibility. It doesn’t directly affect my own playstyle, but I’ve seen how difficult these changes were for many players — some had to completely change the way they played, and some simply left the game.
A similar situation happened when the suspect flag was introduced. Several playstyles that had been natural parts of high sec for years suddenly became impossible or too risky. As a result, some players left the game or abandoned high sec entirely.
Recently I came up with a more local and transparent idea for a war declaration system. It started as a spontaneous thought, but I spent some time writing it down, refining it, and checking whether the mechanics align with current game rules.
I’m aware that localized wars, different War HQ models, and other wardec revisions have been proposed before. I’m not presenting the underlying ideas as entirely new; this proposal is an attempt to combine several of these concepts into one coherent system focused on locality, asset risk, and transparency.
I’m sure I haven’t covered all possible consequences, interactions or exploits — a quick sketch can’t do that.
This is therefore only a proposal, not a finished design. If someone finds it interesting, it may serve as a starting point for discussion or inspiration for future improvements.
Important note: This proposal does not change the core rule of the current war system:
a war can only be declared against a corporation or alliance that owns at least one war eligible structure — regardless of where that structure is located (high sec, low sec, null, wormhole).
Corporations without structures remain fully protected.
1. War HQ and Local War Zones War HQ — strict requirement for declaring war To declare a war, the aggressor must own a War HQ in high sec (0.5+), and it can only be one of the following structures:
• Astrahus
• Fortizar
• Keepstar
Rationale: War HQs represent military footholds and power projection. Industrial hubs (Engineering Complexes, Refineries) are production assets, not frontline military stations. This distinction reinforces the idea that high sec wars are military campaigns, not industrial harassment.
What does NOT qualify as War HQ (even if it is a structure)
• POS (Player Owned Structure) — legacy, no docking
• POCO (Customs Office) — no docking
• Refineries (Athanor / Tatara) — dockable, but not valid as War HQ
• Engineering Complexes (Raitaru / Azbel / Sotiyo) — dockable, but not valid as War HQ
• any structures located in low sec, null sec or wormhole space • any mobile or deployable structures
War eligibility of the defender The defender must own any structure that makes the corporation or alliance war eligible, regardless of type or location.
War locality depends only on the aggressor’s War HQ A war is active only in the Empire regions where the aggressor owns a War HQ:
• Caldari
• Amarr
• Gallente
• Minmatar
The aggressor chooses the scope:
• 1 Empire region
• 2 Empire regions
• 3 Empire regions
• all 4
Third-Party Participation
Other corporations and alliances may join an ongoing war. They do not require their own War HQ and do not create additional war zones.
When a corporation or alliance joins a war, its entire membership is considered part of the war. The aggressor assumes the additional war cost associated with the full membership of each participating corporation or alliance, based on the applicable cost of the active Empire region.
The War HQ remains exclusively tied to the aggressor. Destruction of the aggressor’s War HQ ends the war for all participating entities.
This preserves allied and mercenary gameplay while ensuring that additional manpower carries an additional economic cost.
Destruction of War HQ Destroying the War HQ in a given Empire region ends the war only in that region.
2. Neutral Assistance — simple, binary rules
Neutral logistics, boosters and remote assistance follow clear rules:
• target in war and in combat → neutral assistance = criminal
• target in war but not in combat → no penalty
• target not involved in war → no penalty
Combat = weapon timer or dealing/receiving damage. Combat bursts disabled, mining bursts allowed.
3. Transparency — clear war status in the OVERVIEW
The system introduces explicit war indicators in the OVERVIEW, based on the faction the pilot is currently in.
3.1. “WAR STATUS” column in the Overview
A new column appears in the Overview: WAR STATUS
It shows the war status only for the current faction:
• ACTIVE WAR (Caldari)
• ACTIVE WAR (Amarr)
• ACTIVE WAR (Gallente)
• ACTIVE WAR (Minmatar)
• NO WAR
This ensures the pilot always knows whether the war applies here and now, not globally.
3.2. War tag on ships in the Overview
Enemy ships receive a clear tag in the Overview:
• WAR TARGET (Caldari)
• WAR TARGET (Amarr)
• WAR TARGET (Gallente)
• WAR TARGET (Minmatar)
3.3. No global indicators If the war is not active in the current faction → no tags, no status.
4. War Cost — Resource-Based Dynamic Model
The game tracks:
• dockable Upwell structures in each faction
• dockable structures globally (for war eligibility only)
• members globally
Only dockable structures count toward war cost
• Citadels (Astrahus, Fortizar, Keepstar)
• Engineering Complexes (Raitaru, Azbel, Sotiyo)
• Refineries (Athanor, Tatara)
Structures that do NOT count (no docking)
• POS
• POCO
• mobile deployables
• any non dockable structures
• any non Upwell structures
Cost mechanics
Each faction calculates structure and member cost based on a dynamic economic index set by CCP. This index may be based on:
• base minerals
• local market telemetry
• regional resource valuation
• or a fixed ISK/material formula
Total war cost = sum of costs from all selected factions.
Rationale: A dynamic index allows CCP to adjust war cost without redesigning the system. It prevents players from exploiting a single mineral or market condition. It keeps war cost scalable, predictable, and aligned with CCP’s long term economic telemetry.
Example War Cost Formula (with material base cost)
WarCost = Σ over selected factions i ( (Si × Pi) + (M × Y × Pi) + Bi )
Legend:
Si = number of agresor’s dockable structures in faction i
Pi = dynamic economic index for faction i (set by CCP)
M = total number of agresor members
Y = base cost per member (placeholder, set by CCP)
Bi = base material cost for faction i (tritanium or mineral mix)
Σ = sum over all selected factions where the aggressor has a War HQ
5. Defender’s Structures
Structures in non-selected regions are not affected by the war. Structures in selected regions are subject to the war.
6. Exploit Prevention
The system is designed to eliminate or significantly reduce:
• neutral logistics in combat
• neutral combat bursts
• neutral remote assistance in combat
• alt corp HQ exploits
• HQ in wormholes
• HQ in POCO
• global wars from a single HQ
• accidental criminal flags on neutral logistics
7. Impact on Young Corporations
The system:
• reduces the risk of immediate structure loss
• limits global wars against small corps
• allows young corps to grow locally
• reduces new player attrition
• reduces forced migration into large corps
8. Balancing and Numerical Values
All values are examples and only illustrate the mechanics.
8.1. Base war cost must be balanced by CCP
Too low → spam, abuse, pressure on small corps
Too high → collapse of war ecosystem, lack of conflict
Only CCP has data on:
• war frequency
• structure destruction
• corporation size distribution
• economic telemetry
• exploit detection
Therefore base war cost must be dynamically balanced by CCP.
9. Risk Analysis — assessing possible outcomes
Every war system in EVE carries mechanical, economic and behavioral risks. This proposal also has risks, but their full evaluation requires access to data only CCP possesses.
9.1. Risks related to war cost
• wars too cheap → spam and abuse
• wars too expensive → lack of conflict
9.2. Risks related to locality
• concentration of structures in cheaper factions
• avoidance of more expensive factions
• local overload or local “safe zones”
9.3. Risks related to player behavior
• resource price manipulation
• optimizing structures for cheapest factions
• creating local economic or logistical advantages
9.4. CCP holds the full risk picture
Only CCP has:
• economic telemetry
• war statistics
• structure destruction data
• player behavior data
• exploit detection data
9.5. Final evaluation requires CCP data
This proposal is a conceptual sketch. With access to complete data, CCP may determine that some elements are suboptimal, insufficient, or impractical.
The numerical values and implementation details should therefore be considered placeholders rather than final recommendations.
10. Anticipated Concerns & Clarifications
10.1. “Border Exploitation” Concern
Attackers may argue that defenders can abuse empire borders by sitting on gates and forcing CONCORD responses.
Clarification: Border security is an intentional strategic element of empire space. Crossing into another empire to escape a localized war is a valid logistical choice. If an attacker fires across an inactive border, standard Empire Law applies and CONCORD will respond. If attackers wish to maintain pursuit, they must anchor a War HQ in the adjacent empire.
10.2. “Cost of War / Too Many HQs” Concern
Mercenary groups may claim that requiring multiple War HQs increases overhead.
Clarification: This aligns with CCP’s design direction: wars must involve tangible assets at risk. High sec wars should be deliberate regional campaigns, not low cost cluster wide blanket declarations.
Optional Add On Concept: War Combat Cooldown Across Empire Borders
This proposal does not require any changes to stargate mechanics or Crimewatch. However, an optional extension could introduce a short war combat cooldown when crossing into an Empire region not covered by the active war.
Mechanic (optional):
If a pilot crosses into a non war region while having an active war combat timer (caused by dealing or receiving aggressive actions), the opposing war party may continue pursuit for a limited duration — for example:
• 120 seconds of cross border pursuit
• timer is reset if the target receives damage or is affected by an aggressive module
• once the timer expires, normal Empire Law applies and war status is removed
Purpose:
This allows attackers to finish an active engagement without instantly losing the target due to regional borders, while still preserving the locality and safety of non war regions.
Status:
This is an optional enhancement and not part of the core proposal. It is included only as a potential future refinement for discussion.