Revisiting Highsec Wardecs

First I have 2 questions:

  • How much time and effort does CCP want to put into Highsec (priority?)
  • What does CCP want Highsec to look like in terms of the exchanges that take place between the place where new players start, pve players, and Highsec pvpers?

The Issues

Highsec Wars are largely devoid of any meaningful content.

  • The core gameplay shifted towards attacking / defending structures. This wouldn’t be a problem if (1) Structures weren’t so dispensable (2) the majority of the Highsec mercs didn’t combine forces.
  • Daily content with war decs almost exclusively consists of interdicting at / around trade hubs. Part of this problem is due to how cumbersome the activity of locating, hunting, stalking, and killing a target is coupled with the massively decreased chance of you finding something or someone worth your time to fight (I will touch on these points in a second).
  • Upwell Structure ACL allows too much freedom for a group to dodge a Wardec and not have any downside whatsoever. I don’t think that everyone should be forced to take relentless beatings, but no one ought to be immune to meaningful player interaction.
  • The issue with using the ACL and an alt corp wouldn’t be a problem if structures in Highsec had some form of modified asset safety where 100% of a players belongings weren’t 100% safe.

Can We Fix It?

You see a lot of these issues revolve around core gameplay and design philosophy with Highsec. I understand that it’s delicate because new players and all and that’s why it’s important that it’s made clear exactly how CCP wishes wars to function:

Are they fine with the mostly content starved structure removal tool that they are now? Sure lots of kills are to be had around trade hubs but is that all wars should be? They were much more than that in the past…

  • Locator agents need a revamp:
    (1) Locator agents can’t differentiate if someone is in space or in an Upwell structure: I don’t think I need to elaborate why this is an issue.
    (2) Locator agents should tell you if said person is online / offline: The unfortunate abuse of the Logserver by certain groups which lead to the removal of the Watchlist severely impacted players willingness and ability to hunt selected targets… shoehorning players even more into the blanket dec / hub camping meta we’ve seen.

  • As the owner / manager of Athanors there’s very little if any counterplay to people freely ninja mining from you.
    (1) The Moon chunk ought to “legally” belong to the Athanor owner / anyone with permissions on the ACL. Harvesting the chunk while not on the list makes you go Suspect OR occur a limited engagement timer with the Structure owner and/OR anyone on the structure’s ACL: This provides a way for structure owners to protect their investment and provides healthy counterplay to thieves that isn’t out of reach nor unreasonable for the average person (I don’t consider having a personal gank fleet capable of killing tanked Orcas not having to have a bump Alt reasonable).

  • Take a gander at structure losses in Highsec and you’ll see that most (an insanely high %) are killed with no opposition whatsoever. Doesn’t matter if it’s Pirat’s 20-30 man Rattlesnake fleet or a small multiboxers group of 5 alts.
    (1) I don’t think this is anything we can fix, but we should discourage laziness, the inability to protect either through direct combat, hired guns, and/or negotiation:
    (2) Implement some form of modified asset safety where all items have a % chance to drop (just like ship kills and such). The loot that doesn’t drop goes to the pilots asset safety: This gives better incentive to protect and defend your structures. More at stake, more to lose, more apt to actually try to do something other than shrug off a few billion isk.


That’s not exhaustive nor do I think it completely fixes issue but it’s a damn good start. The number of meaningful fights over structures can probably be counted on a set of hands if not a single hand, and I’m not gonna lie… it gets old being told that the timer board has ops that are 90% likely to result in a fight. I hate getting dressed up and then have the party get cancelled.

Some main points from discussion below:

Regarding your point about the ACL allowing too much flexibility I think you need to go a step further with this, and it’s only the alliance, not being on the ACL. There needs to be some benefit to exposing yourself to risk.

Though I would wait and see what CCP do to moons in highsec first as they may be taking all value away right now.

This however is a no go. It just kills structure use except for essential items and forces everyone back into stations. It’s just not a viable thing.

Good advice.

You make a good point. The idea was proposed as a way for it to be financially worth the while to bash. If they are gonna be empty and I defended maybe it wouldn’t be so bad if they rewarded more ISK for the time and effort involved.

Like Nevyn has said…

I think we should wait on the CCP change they mentioned as to ore coming off the moons (except for the moongoo types)
But otherwise, Lore wise at least in Caldari Space, 72% of all moons, planets, and asteroid belts are legally owned like a claim by Sukuuvestaa and Kaalakiota Mega Corporations, with the rest of it split between the other 6.

If anything Athanors and other Upwell structures should include requiring Charters to be place in Empire space. I can not agree any ACL suspect mechanics for moon belts, cause you own the stations…you do not own the Rocks created by blasting a chunk off the moon.

As to the other…maybe without charters you dont get access safety or something idk how to fix that cause i always just keep stuff in NPC stations anyway since Upwells got introduced as a rule.

In regards to Structures, at least the medium and large ones, and here I’m only thinking when they’re anchored in Highsec, I think the main issue is that they’re are too difficult to defend unless you happens to be in a huge corp or alliance. I think the fire power of structures (medium/large) should scale with the size of the owning Corp/Alliance; the bigger the Corp/Alliance the less powerful the structure become.
Right on top of my head, this late night, I’m thinking:

  • For total member count in Corp/Alliance < 75 = 50% bonus to Weapon and EW effectiveness
    • 50% Damage bonus or RoF
    • 50% Increased EW range (Web, Scrambler)
    • 50% Increased Neutralizer drain amount.
  • For total member count in Corp/Alliance 76-150 = 25% Bonus to Weapon and EW effectiveness
    • 25% Damage bonus or RoF
    • 25% Increased EW range (Web, Scrambler)
    • 25% Increased Neutralizer drain amount.
  • For total member count in Corp/Alliance 150+ = No changes to what it is now.

Now of course it’s up to CCP to find a good balance of when the bonuses should apply and how big the bonus should actually be. This way it gives smaller corp/alliances a slightly bigger chance of mounting a defense effort and it would also require slightly more preparation on the aggressors side, at least when it comes to the people that are “solo”-killing structures with multi-boxer fleet.

1 Like

i’d be cool with limited engagement between me ninja mining moon goo and the corp who owns the structure, but it’s really not anyone else’s business

Disagree. Ownership should matter, so you can’t hide the structure in a one-man alt corp and mine with your main characters while retaining war immunity. If you want the benefits of a mining structure you should have to be in the corp with it and accept the risks of structure ownership.

So, giving huge bonuses for putting your structures in alt corps and defending them with fleets from your real corp?


I think the jury is still out on the full effects of the new wardec mechanics. It is too soon yet to rebalance as there are many groups emerging that are structure bashing in HS. Lots of citadels are going boom.

Overall the structures (aside from XL) are weak and not worth defending vs a larger foe. Increase the defense capabilities and you might see some more defenders.

Against the suspect timer for mining on Athanors. That’s a price you pay for playing those in HS.
And if you don’t like the local group using holding corps then just dec them and blow the structures up. They are pretty weak already.


Then high sec should get equal moons to Null sec.
You can’t claim that both are the price you pay, you have to give somewhere.

NS doesn’t have Concord protecting the miners…

NS also doesn’t have concord protecting the thieves. You can’t use Concord as an excuse to not give highsec Null level moons AND as an excuse to protect thieves.
That’s not balanced, either one or the other. And to add a cherry on top to the suspect out of alliance idea it also means the miners have to become invested in defending against a wardec since they can’t just ignore it because holding corp.

So most hi-sec corps with structures are alt corps…so who doesn’t benefit from max bonuses for their structure and just call in allies from their member filled corps?

And if CCP come up with a way to keep players in the same corp as their structures we get a situation where recruitment are like ‘Sorry no more people or our structures get weaker’.

Linking mechanics to corp size is very clunky and can be gamed. One of the few redeeming features of the new wardec systems was to introduce a flat fee rather than charge based on corp size.

I’d rather see the first bit of this without the second. Out of Corp people (or alliance if in an alliance) should get weaker benefits always. This really does benefits to risk even in highsec. Probably could even allow strengthening highsec bonuses closer to the Null sec ones at that point since highsec Freeport wouldn’t be as good.

For defence right now an Ast is maybe worth 2 battleships in a fight. Change that value instead to be… 1 Fax and 1 command ship while maintaining current firepower instead. And I think you have a much stronger situation with structures, but not one that gives them any more benefit if they are solo without a defence fleet.
I’m imagining the current 2 launchers, 2 upwell logistics modules, 2 upwell boost modules and maybe even leave them the utility slots for neuts if the logi and boost slots are locked to logi and boosts. It would push them over 8 slots for fort and keepstar if they were all high slot modules still but eh, I’m pretty sure they can handle that in the code now, and if not they could always mid slot something for structures only like boosts.
edit note. More modules also equals more loot when killing one even without any change to asset safety.

Maybe re-work the whole entire line of Upwell coding…

Allow them to be repped like a poco, instead of auto full repair at the end of a timer.

And I still say Charters could be used to tweak the mechanics for Empire space…
Whether that’s for
Asset Safety
or service modules.

Maybe the auto repair to ships and drones doenst work if the structure is out of charters, and its internal repair facilities are shut down. IDK

Structures yes.

But you do not own the belts, or the anoms, or moon belts…it is not yours till it is in your hangar. Period.

1 Like

Then do you have an alternative proposal to keep people from holding the structure in a one-man alt corp and mining with their real corp, gaining all of the benefits of structure ownership with none of the risks?

1 Like

You’re right but look at it this way… Why would anyone put up their own Athanors when they can simply leech off of someone else while they have very little they can do about it?

My proposal ensures that the owner has the freedom to actually do something about.

Edit: I think Upwell structures have incredible potential to be points of contention, things worth fighting over, and things that are very useful to us as pilots… but the balance is out of wack and there are some issues with how they were implemented.

Disclaimer: I don’t own or use a structure. I still live in a station. I am a care bear, who has been playing causally since 2013.

I think that asset safety has to be maintained if you want people like me to eventually move into a structure.

I know a lot of people will not like this, but I want a small structure that small corporations (3-5 players - 8-10 tunes) can easily put up and maintain (replacement for a small POS). It is OK if it has slot limits that specialize it for 1 or 2 uses (e.g. belt ore refining and 1 ship size of manufacturing).

I would want an “auto defense” for when everyone is logged off - provided the structure is powered up. If the structure is not powered up, then it should be possible to “hack” it (mini-game?) and steal it. Player assets in locked secure containers with passwords active - should be safe, everything else is potentially at risk.

I support changes to the Upwell Structures that provide new game play, but I think it needs to be balanced from both the builder and the “destroyer” sides.

I play 2 or 3 times a week, I do it for stress relief from a tough job.

you are correct, and i can not believe the amount of salt and tears I have seen from others doing just that.

Now the thing is…
A lot of Athanor owners want you to pay them 10% and hardly or never mine the ore themselves.

So i must ask, if i wanted to mine on a moon with an owner like that, that is not friend…Why should pay you that 10%?

Why should I be your free labor? If you want the rocks, and there fore the industry power from the minerals or the ISK from selling such stuff…get out there and mine it yourself.

In fact let me break it down like this…
1 Athanor= approx 5k fuel for 1 month (i know last summer this approx 100 million ISK if you bought fuel off market)
Typical 4 wk belt = .7 to 1.3 billion ISK in material (sometimes 2.5) depending on type.

I have seen some corps with 30-40 moons in a region.
avg 10% in 1 month: 2.1 billion - 3.9 billion without doing any of the work except collecting the 10% and refueling the athanors. at a huge profit…for doing nothing, not even mining the belts. Yet these owners want to cry about leeches…pffft

edit: In fact i can not wait for CCP to nerf the moons, and I really hope the producer sticks to his word and removes everything but the actual moongoo rocks.

Well as in most fights one side usually tries to ensure victory by bringing what it takes to win. Here would be my suggestion to a structure owner or small group faced with a Wardec:

  • Network! Find others in your area that are in similar positions and come up with defensive agreements. Maybe they can pool together resources to make sure everyone in the agreement can be defended.

Sure the aggressor will likely do what they can to bring more, but the N+1 strategy is apart of every area of space (unfortunately). Not sure exactly what the answer should be on this one but i do know that something with a scaling mechanic based on corp size is likely to get games In some way.

Yeah a limited engagement between the structure owner and the offender could work. What I pictured was the opportunity for a system-wide protectorate of some sorts. Imagine all the structure owners in like Otela paying a small group or individuals to kill suspects as they try to mine from their Athanors… I think that sounds incredible!

Capitalism… and I agree with it here. They are footing the bill for the structure. It’s their responsibility to protect it in time of war. They have to stock it with Fuel and make sure the lights stay on.

It’s just like a middle-man or manager for anything. If an individual or small group doesn’t like their rates, either put your own up or find someone to negotiate better rates with. Or you could give him the finger, have his Athanors blown up, and laugh at him!

1 Like