If you wardec a corp, you should be able to mine it’s moons without suspect timer.
Additionally,
ALL out-of-corp chars should then get the suspect timer (except as above), no ACL etc to bypass the wardec by alt corps.
1 Like
Imagine that, PIRAT mining fleet.
Love it. Would be funny,.
1 Like
If you want your cake, gonna make you eat the whole damn thing! 
1 Like
This is the bit that making benefits tied to being in corp manages. If you aren’t getting full benefits out of corp, now you care about saving your structure.
This is already true, because the fuel cost doesn’t scale.
You don’t want a mechanical bonus because that encourages shoving a corp full of alts without any care about if people contribute and just forming single mega corps.
Eh, I’m good on both of those things (assuming you mean alliance as well as corp for alliances as well.)
And yet that has had has no effect (it doesn’t provide a personal “benefit for me” approach for members).
Alt corps are everywhere to hold assets while members sit in non-eligible Corps and don’t ever try to defend, nor attack the War HQ of an attacker - something defenders were creaming for before the changes, and it was going to be so great. They were suddenly going to fight, yet haven’t changed behaviour.
There isn’t a way to provide a non-mechanical bonus that hopes to change people’s motiviation. Highsec people are not like nullsec. The idea of an empire doesn’t mean much. It has to be about individual, personal benefit.
And yes, as I wrote above, alts provide an opportunity to abuse by carebears, but if it is tied into activity, including activities that actually require people to be out in space at some point (eg. refining requires ores to refine, which requires mining, or at least hauling from a market, etc.)
Abuse might happen, but if the numbers are right, it will become more of a PITA than it is worth and if a Corp is full of alts, then a structure will be more easily lost, and the benefits along with them for a time.
I don’t think that is an issue.
Sure, that makes sense
And it should never do so, beyond being a member of a corp giving you full access to the bonus.
This isn’t WoW or some other PvE game where you farm up your stronghold etc. This is a primary PvP game, and it doesn’t reset, so you don’t want snowball effect mechanics which encourage people into larger and larger mega corps ending up with one corp running the game.
Yes, that’s how it would work. Being a member gives you the benefit.
Having more activity from members increases what the bonus is.
However currently, the characters aren’t members. Non-members can have exactly the same benefit. The proposals above offer change to that, that gives people a risk-reward choice personally.
And that’s the bit that shouldn’t happen. That isn’t a risk/reward choice, that’s a false choice, and promotes nothing but bloated corps.
It’s the way nullsec already works and it is fine.
No, no it isn’t.
Firstly it’s not fine, it’s the cause of stagnation in nullsec.
Secondly it’s not the way Nullsec works at all. It doesn’t magically give larger refining percentages in a structure because your members are mining. It doesn’t do anything like that at all.
It is the way it works. The more active a system is, the higher the defensive modifier is, and the harder it is to attack that system.
When Corps/Alliances can’t keep all of their systems active, then it becomes easier to take those systems.
The activity approach has nothing to do with the stagnation, and is one of the better aspects of Fozzie sov (especially for smaller nullsec groups).
Harry Potter wanding for sov and more importantly, the existing broken nature of Upwell structures is the reason for the stagnation.
Seriously, have to ever taken part in nullsec and in sov warfare?
Which only affects vulnerability windows, nothing to do with the structure itself yet again.
What?
Go learn sov mechanics Nevin. You don’t know what you are talking about.
- Learn to spell peoples names, it’s literally right on the screen in front of you, it’s rude to not get it right.
- How about you explain in what way the ADM gives a bonus to structures then.
Yes. So what?
I never said it did Nevin.
Nullsec isn’t highsec. Sov is about systems, which is something highsec groups can’t own (except James 315 of course).
For highsec, it can’t be about system effects (including how long it takes), but it can be about assets, because that’s what highsec groups can own, and it’s what wars are tied to.
Wars are tied to assets at a fundamental level now. If we want to change the nature of wars, then we need to start with the assets, or remove them from wars again, which I don’t think it going to happen. The current system is an improvement on the previous system, but it still has some pretty broken aspects.
Hence those suggestions.
I get it Nevin. You don’t like any suggestion that provides more risk, so providing more reward as a motivator seems totally alien of a concept. We are going off topic into the sov area (but really, you should learn what you are talking about before trying to write anything).
So…
- I was right, ADM doesn’t provide bonuses to Structures. You were trying to prove me wrong with utterly unrelated stuff.
- We were talking about structure bonuses when you claimed that was how Null Sec worked, so yes, you did say it affected structures. It’s this little thing called Context and Implication.
- Therefore you were wrong about how Null Sec structures work, and your points were utterly irrelevant.
And a bonus 4. We’ve established you are deliberately trolling now since you are being deliberately rude.
No you were wrong. What you said was:
That is not true.
It doesn’t only affect vulnerability windows.
However, that isn’t relevant to wars. Systems aren’t relevant to wars, but activity based benefits already exist in the game and could be used to provide benefits to structures for highsec groups. The bigger, more active they are, then the more individual, personal benefit for members.
Again, Context. I was talking about structures, which this entire conversation was about. And with regards to structures that is all it affects.
Faylee, most smallish groups have from 1 to 5 Athanors.
But the medium to large, have anywhere from 10-20 minimum to up to around 30-40 on avg.
And groups like Silent Company(SICO), or dare i say Grumpy Old Farts(LOGOF) may have just 30 in a single system and operate entire constellations under their umbrella.
Of course those 2 are polar opposites from what i have seen and heard.
SICO has hundreds of resource collectors around the clock.
LOGOF has 1-2 procs if anybody at all at any time their Athanors frack a chunk.
Now in my personal experience of operating as a manager for a group with up to 40 moons.
It is not that difficult to maintain them. So it comes down to the question of why have them in the first place?
1.) cause organization is trying to create an organization for whatever reason (blues and associates having resource collection content)
1a.) So if for blues, there might be some sort of rulings for everyone to get along, get their piece of the pie, and therefore hence 10% of what a miner mines makes sense to pay for the maintenance, and extra ISK from that going towards gank security, anti-gank security, and possibly even wardec defense.
-or-
2.) it is simply a profit venture. Cause everyone is willing to pay 10% right?
-or-
3.) The person saying “I” want to have the real estate secured so no one else is doing the content, and if I want to use it then I already have it. type of thinking (content denial opportunists)
^^ those are my 3 main points without a lot of details for each of why in my experience someone wants these athanors.