I quite like this point. But in support of it (and in support of @Black_Pedro) would actually suggest increasing the payout for both LS and nul.
Keep the cost of the cores the same for all three locations but tie payout to the defence multiplier. So, if your fitted athanor gets 1.1 x defence in LS, that’s what a looted core also pays out. Etc.
This is in principle, as we don’t know what the current values will do in practice, but I do like the idea of tieing rewards to security level.
Some structures have been knocked down. But there’s still plenty left.
As long as there are people putting up structures but not committing to them, it would suggest they are not expensive enough. And as long as people with structures are barely getting decced because they aren’t worth it, it would suggest rewards for bashing need to go up.
But such is the elegance of NPC orders for quantum cores. CCP have complete control of both structure cost and bashing reward so they can adjust as needed.
Then let me change it to, ‘not enough meaning to defend’.
But that was the problem, very few people were bashing structures. Then people were only bashing abandoned structures. Hopefully this changes that.
The goal ultimately is to get more people bashing active structures. Hopefully active structures that are actively defended.
If you have a better proposal to get fights over structures (or fights in general), have at it. Cause thats what the game needs the most, especially hi-sec.
I’m fine with this idea in principle.
As long as the end result is wardecs and fights happen.
If the result is that we go back to the status quo where people put up structures and write them off with no attachment to them, it would be counter productive.
I think its probably been looked at incompletely anyway.
Is there an incentive to get me to turn from a station holder-indy to a station holder-basher?
I dont really think a small slice of a 600m pie at best is really worth it. Maybe it is, maybe I have a slewed impression of the value of a core.
Further, I guess itll not be clear till we know
I’m aware this is hypothetical, but can cores fit in abyss capable ships?
You can probably still put one in a can and shoot it though.
Be wierd if the can exploded but the core remained and generated a new can
Or an ACME Instant Station lol.
Yeah fair point on the ship type though, just plucking a “certain destruction outside regular mechanics” idea out of my head.
I’ll pay that. Whether I like the potential consequences is neither here nor there.
As to ideas for promoting fights, in space or over structures, you have precisely no chance of this carebear providing any.
I would be a bit concerned if I was you, because I have talked to quite a few contacts and many are giving up on their structures.
You could see it that way, or you could see it as risk/time of life/cost was not out of wrack.
As we have blown up structures I can say that looting and salvaging them is worth it, they were averaging out at 540m for us. Well worth doing. However the issue is that you have to put your own war HQ down unless you can piggy back in as a defender, which kinda balances off against it.
I am looking at it from the point of view of someone who wants to war dec to remove structures but have a strong enemy that will take out our war HQ. This stopped us dead in our tracks, it just increased the risk of Blackflag. coming after us and added significant cost to something that we had factored in as losing as soon as Blackflag. were aware of our wars.
There is no elegance about it, it is a blunt instrument used to make it worth doing in nullsec that makes having a structure in hisec a zero sum game. All they need to do is make the quantum core enable tethering and external repairs and this is a great change.
The reward for who, the successful attacker or the structure owner?
Well, the wardec is an added cost that offsets the reward somewhat, not to mention the wardeccer has to make the same ante and put a vulnerable station in space unlike in lowsec say, but I don’t think there is much problem with every structure having the same core cost regardless of space. The structures cost themselves are already like that and I don’t know how CCP would even go about balancing that.
As usual, Risk vs. Reward is more relevant when it comes to resource generation, not destruction. The value of resources (and efficiencies to add value to resources) should be tied to risk so there is incentive for people to put themselves at risk in exchange for the ability to spew more rewards into our shared economy, but for destruction and PvP it makes less sense. Attacking someone is a response to people taking risks, and isn’t really something CCP can directly control.
That is the general case, but maybe wars to need some adjustment if declaring war is too easy. I kinda think not given how much risk and cost are piled onto aggressors under the latest system, which includes the attackers having to put a core on the line as well.
Go suspect? No, that opens too much room for flagging games to be played and sniping from under CONCORD’s skirt which is silly and unintuitive gameplay. However, I would totally support some sort of new flag that allows players to spontaneously pick a side and join a structure fight either on the attacker or defenders side. It would be great if CCP could find a way to make a structure fight organically escalate and have people join just for that fight without all the rest of the hassle and baggage that comes with a wardec.
This would remove the whole ‘skin in the game’ for the wardeccers that everyone thought was good idea including CCP so I’m not sure we will ever see it. Still, I think structure fights in highsec would be more interesting if there was a way to allow people to join.
Structure owner, the rewards are not that great and the risk increased massively.
That is the obvious answer but the actual act of doing it is largely risk free as long as you have not war decked others and messed up on your target intel.
In my opinion then they should have the same value and the rigs give the same benefit, still as I point out the actual act of blowing up the structure is a lot less in hisec.
But the lack of risk when in action is important and meaningful.
It was a little tongue in cheek to be honest. When we only have nullsec entities running structures in hisec then your idea flies.
I still think it is a good idea, speaking as someone who has removed several war dec HQ’s. And was looking to develop people with a bit of backbone to fight war decs, though this change made this so much harder.
This i can sympathise with.
I’ve always wanted smaller/reduced version of a WHQ since 2015.
And since cores were announced the idea of small structures has reappeared and i support it.
Drac is misquoting me there a little.
I think it would be far more accurate to say I support an increase to the reward for them in highsec. It doesn’t have to exactly match Null Sec, much as I feel it should given Null sec gains from better resources already so they don’t need to be better at every single thing to have an advantage, but narrowing the gap from where it is now seems appropriate given the increased risk that these cores will bring to highsec structures.
(& well, low sec should totally have the same bonuses as Null)
I am not quoting you at all. I have no idea what you are talking about, I agree with your statement on making the rigs have the same benefit, but nothing else.
See the following quote:
So, that is a minimum 600m for the core plus observed 540m average drop. As to subsequent split, even with fueled structures, I have seen Pirat simply grind down undefended structures using 2 leshaks. Takes forever, and means actual isk/h is not great, but does give an idea as to sort of returns that might be doable.
(And based on my observation of about 80 bashes over the last 4 weeks or so, the size of the drop can be spectacularly higher. Albeit this was for “lapsed” structures, with no-one rushing to empty them - as I did observe happening at one today, before DT.)
One gankers structure had a very large amount of fuel in it, it was as if he expected it to last for months.
Hmm well call me greedy but thats not really incentive to have to create an alt, grind up a KB, and make (ugh) friends.
Yes I know I put hurdles in my way. What can I say, I like a challenge lol
Incidently, not including the alt in the DST Ill need to actually scoop the core if it drops before it gets yoinked…
By jove, I think I just cracked it.
To the Ninja Mobile!
Anyone know which does more DPS, a Leshak or 3 SBs with an Orca full of bombs in reload range? Asking for a friend
We are going to do that 
Unless they changed it the raitaru one can be nabbed with a certain destroyer that can be fit with a less than two second align time and still take the cargo size.
Yes. This is a total increase of cost/risk with no benefit in reward. CCP feels it is justified, and looking at the incomplete statistics from the outside I tend to agree with them, but I completely get why people are upset at being hit with the stick with no carrot.
Sometimes that is necessary, especially in a persistent sandbox game, but I get why some people are unhappy.
Of course that isn’t true. The ally mechanic and the requirement for you own structure ensure that you have put 1B+ asset on the line that any group in the game could be shooting in 4 hours.
Regardless, it is still more dangerous to live in lowsec or nullsec. There should be a risk premium.
I accept you think maybe there should be a buff to utility compensate for increased risk, and I won’t quibble over this. But as a general idea, rewards should always be greater in more dangerous space, independent of any risk to the structure itself.
Fair point. The bash itself when no-one has joined is safer.
The reality is we will all have to wait and see how highsec structure owners react to the changes, as well those that might now be induced to attack. But like all changes with uncertain outcomes, it probably is best to wait to see what happens and then react with some buffs to rewards or safety if the results are undesirable.
Personally, I don’t think this will change much at all. People’s brains will adjust to the new cost structure quickly and it will become the new normal in just a few months. People will factor in the cost and we will probably barely notice the impact in most situations and it will be business as usual.
How many people get real allies? Most of the time we offered to ally people did not even reply because they had given up, it is low risk.
I am de-subbing soon, punish CCP for something their volunteers did and will play Cyberpunk 2077, I hope the release date sticks… When I come back in March/April I will run around hisec and see just how many structures there are. I am expecting to see most systems devoid of structures.
Oh I just remembered something, I assume someone has addressed it but…
Why arent the cores just automatically grandfathered into existing structures?
I know of 10 people who have un-subscribed because of the game going the way it is. The one guy was running 26 Alts.
I have unsubscribed my 2 accounts because the game is just become boring for me… Nothing to do with cores just in General I find nothing of value to do anymore. Granted I have been playing the game for 13+ Years so time to move on.