Why is it that we see tons of Nullsec players alts setting up industry backbones and operations in Highsec? Could it be that itâs worthwhile in ISK and effort? It is different though, when youâre running a mission you havenât had to do anything other than accept the mission, warp to the deadspace pocket, and begin⌠To run an Athanor you have to invest in the structure, place it down, have it be vulnerable to wars, manage and upkeep it, and then worry about freeloadersâŚ
Highsec absolutely is a game in and of itself. Highsec is where we see the majority of the games players, and they almost certainly donât primarily consist of new players.
If you arenât on the ACL of the defending Athanor, the aggressor will have a limited engagement with you.
Which is one of the reasons why bashing structures is terrible. Itâs not a bad concept, but there needs to be a carrot on a string attached to it:
- It needs to be financially worth your time
OR - It needs to have strategic value
OR - It needs to result in meaningful content (a fight or interaction)
Currently those 3 points rarely occur for the average player. I could see someone wanting to bash a structure and maybe clear out a system because being able to control who harvests and refines with it matters. So yes, bashing a structure because at the root of the conflict that person wants the profits from harvesting should totally be a thing - Thatâs what we call content. Itâs a narrative. Itâs something that players can get behind!
- Iâm not aware of any. We have 1-2 members that independently bash structures just as something to do and they represent the bulk of structures that get destroyed in Highsec. If you look at Piratâs killboard youâll see that these structures are hardly worth the ISK it takes to start the war, hardly worth the effort to show up for the timers, and hardly ever (like never) result in meaningful content. Weâve had a few members that independently cleared structures that became completely burnt out because of these reasons.
Pirat as an organization primarily pokes at structures because weâve been paid to do so or because we think weâll stir up a hornets nest and get a fight (rarely happens).
I want there to be actual room for conflict tied to structures in general. Currently they serve as a way for players to utilize a loophole so they can have their cake and eat it too. My suggestions absolutely donât benefit the lazy, afk, freeloader that can barely say that they are playing Eve Online but thatâs not important anyway because in my opinion CCP ought to be catering to the people that actually play the game. They should progressively reward players for being risky and not allowing structure owners to be a free and open faucet.
Hope this explains my feelings on the matter.
There currently is no need to fight or be in the owning corp. This has been made evident ever since CCP made their changes allowing players to reap the benefits of structures while have 0 risk.
I agree that thereâs currently no premise for crimewatch flags on resource extraction, but that doesnât mean that there shouldnât be. Iâm ambitious, sure but I think this game requires some drastic changes to keep it afloat and CCP sees this as well as noted publicly by CSM members. They state that they are excited about the future changes and health of the game. They note that CCP is going to have to rip off a few bandaids in the short term and that itâs going to hurt but that eventually we will land in a healthy place.
Sweeping changes are sometimes needed. Iâm not overly fussed about Crimewatch but that doesnât mean that a redesign or re-imagining how things work canât or shouldnât happen.
Yup, nothing wrong with a big departure if CCP is up to the task for making the systems and experience better suited to their game.
Sure but each area of space is vastly different. The method for harvesting remains the same⌠All CCP literally has to do is find a way to code Structure Ownership + Starbase Charters (or some other kind of fuel-like tax) dictate that the owning corp has rights to dictate who can legally harvest.
Tie it into the weapons safety with a message that pops up:
- Green Safety: You cannot perform this action. Please contact the structure owner for permission
- Yellow Safety: You are performing an action that will flag you as Suspect. Take caution.
I donât know how much simpler the mechanism for understand can get. Like I said, the areas of space are different and I donât think itâs a bad idea that CCP design some of the systems to behave differently.
Nullsec wouldnât need something like this because if Pandemic Horde were to ever jump Rorquals in to harvest Goonswarms moons, theyâd drop Titans on them and thank them for the free kills.
To my point about CCP making big fundamental changes in the future: http://dunkdinkle.com/csm-summit-march-2020/
So no, I donât think itâs far fetched or bad to re-think how some fundamental mechanics and core gameplay is approached - yes, even combat and wardecs. No matter whose idea it is, someone is going to praise it, someone is going to quit the game over it, and someone is going to just keep playing the game the best they can. If CCP makes sweeping fundamental changes to how wars work and it results in some people quitting, but ultimately results in better gameplay then itâs a noble sacrifice.
We saw a fundamental change to how wars operate and in my eyes and the eyes of many others, it did NOT result in better gameplay. Just safer gameplay. Trust me, I cringe when I see a fellow alliance member of mine mindlessly farming idiots in shuttles and noobships. I cringe when I see an entire week of structure kills that resulted in NO meaningful player interaction. Itâs these reasons why I find it hard to login most days. I guess Iâm still holding onto my romanticized version of how wars were much more interactive between players from when I first started. I just want to feel that again. I know Iâm not alone in that.
lol, done even bothering with you.
When you figure out reality and quit can I have your stuff? 
Youâve yet to explain your position on this other than ânew players in Highsecâ. Yet if you look around you see that itâs not the case.
So people on the a m ACL can still mine the ore without any timers and still be immune to decs?
That really sucks.
Timers should work both ways. So if i dec an Athanor, anyone not in house that mines a belt Iâm decced with should also get a timer with me.
Or we go back to suspect and ACLâs donât stop you going suspect.
1 Like
Explain? You are the one suggesting major game changes, it falls on you to know the topic.
Do you have any idea how much content is not in high sec and could never be?
Imagine warp bubbles in high sec, how would that work?
Before you propose changes maybe learn to play?
No you can do it like this:
- Structure owner is at war
- You are not in the structure owners corp but have rights to harvest the moon belt
- You are in a war immune corp
- You decide to harvest the moon, which for the duration of your mining (you acquire a timer - 15 minutes maybe) where the other aide in the Wardec can legally attack you.
The reasoning is this: You are harvesting resources that belong to a group thatâs at war.
I have explained. Itâs up to you to read.
I totally agree that areas should have their uniqueness and niches. Iâm not arguing that at all! What Iâm trying to explain is that Structures in their current state are not conflict drivers when they ought to be. Iâm not trying to create a Sov map in Highsec. All Iâm asking is that when a player or group invests in an Athanor, making them vulnerable to war, that they are able to protect their investment from freeloaders⌠as well as properly installing a progression of risk / reward. You shouldnât be able to remain immune to war, yet reap the benefits through this loophole.
Fancy words for you want to own something in space you do not own.
Same old same old, everyone thinks their reason is special.
You want to be able to defend your ore, put your structure in low sec then.
That weird complexity is why Iâm in favour of a blanket anyone not in corp/alliance goes suspect as it keeps it simple and keeps it a double edged sword.
Trying to force us back to the crimewatch 1.0 web of inherited timers where you donât know why you got the timer half the time is doomed to fail., so Iâll take the simple option that is possible.
Take a look at the data in the February MER. Youâll see thereâs a whole lot of resource harvesting and production going on in Highsec that goes unchecked. Why? All you need to do is be immune from Wardecs and you can reap the benefits of owning a structure with none of the risk!
This is just part of balancing the game. You still havenât given an actual reason that makes sense as to why youâre against a change in the concept of âowningâ or ârentingâ moons in Empire space.
You just choose to ignore my points about why this is needed in order to probably balance risk / reward and serve as a progressive stepping stone into other areas of space. So Iâll take the high road from now on and not feed the troll. Enjoy.
Not just you, EVERYONE, ANYONE can do it.
Thatâs a good thing it is only bad to greedy risk adverse players.
You really want to make a difference, we can return war dec to not be tied to structures. That failed change is what made everything safe.
War dec was an economic counter to risk free.
Remind me how you previously wardecced miners in NPC corps and single person mission corps againâŚ
Oh wait, you didnât because it was pointless.
What the wardec change did was allow these people to form social groups without getting constantly targeted by pirat to give an example. It had no impact on their safety, only on their likely retention via social groups as the most significant aspect to retention.
What we are proposing is actually higher risk than even the old wardec system since you canât hide your miners away safe from wardecs and still mine your moons.
I think a simpler approach would be to debuff the mining ability of the Orca.
At the moment, aside from bumping, which itself is boring, no win play since the Orcas can just warp off and back again, there isnât much most refinery owners can really do in highsec.
If the Orca was debuffed, then weâd see the return to barge/exhumer based mining, rather than them just being support for Orcas.
That would make ganking a viable option for Corps that really do want to fight back against the ninja miners.
1 Like
So remind me how cost effective ganking is vs procs⌠Oh wait itâs not. Donât be stupid.
Typical Fuckard response I normally get from you.
If people want to gank, they will. At the very least, itâs easier than ganking an Orca, which truly is non-viable for most.
At least then also, bumping the orca to be out of boost range is also something viable, so that the barges and exhumers donât mine as much, and the competition is less effective against the owners.
An unboosted proc already mines more than an Orca.
So forcing them from Orcas to Procs actually increases the competition even before boosts.
Itâs like you donât know about the gameplay you are trying to be an authority on or something and have had to already resort to direct insults.
It doesnât, because if you can move the Orca out of range with bumping, then they canât just drop into the fleet hangar and have to go back to cans, which can be shot and looted.
Actually, I just responded to your insult in your initial reply. So at least hold the same standard for yourself. I know itâs hard.
In relation to knowing the gameplay, I have alts that AFK mine in Orcas now and I have gank alts that operate in 0.5 systems.
I donât profess to be an expert though, just offering ideas.
Sticking to those rather than going straight to calling me stupid might get a more measured response than calling you out for what you are.
So I agree with this⌠although I think thereâs balance that can be struck between what we had and what we have now. I understand the concern over player retention although I have my doubts that CCPs data gave a whole and isolated picture that Wars were public enemy #1.
The idea of fights happening over a tangible item or thing are cool, but it has to be done correctlyâŚ
I donât disagree with this, and I think the Orca definitely needs a nerf to be in-line with an exclusive fleet support ship in Highsec. Natural evolution to this will be profit-loss ganking max-tanked multiboxed fleets of Skiffs to compensate for having to sacrifice yield.
Yeah I think that is inevitable too. We already see a lot of Skiffs supporting Orcas in 0.5 systems. If the Orca was debuffed back to fleet support, then it would still be difficult to gank them, but still easier than the current mechanics with the way the Orca is.