I keep my main stuff in a NPC station, ore in a refinery, and my minerals, salvage, and blueprints in a engineer complex.
If could lose everything in an attack, why would I even keep anything of value in a citadel.
In highsec (and lowsec too) you probably wouldn’t.
In nullsec though, stations are few and far between. Upwell structures provide convenience and just being able to login, rat, dock up and log off is far better then login, move to ratting system, rat, move back again, dock, log off.
That convenience is a strong motivator because spending time travelling isn’t much fun in EVE.
Anyone else agree with this?
Yes would be great but will never happen
+1 (also added a 
to that post in support)
I like that idea too
The problem with the original idea is that it limits a defender’s options. Yes, the defender can defend their structure, but camp the gates coming in isn’t possible because the aggressor can just sit on the other side untouchable. Want to go attack any assets the aggressor has to cause conflicting timers, not possible without your own war Dec.
Think about this, a merc group could easily pop Citadels one at a time without fear of allies harassing them anywhere else using this method. It seems very unbalanced.
2 Likes
Merc corps dont blow anything up unless paid to do so (or bored/self-interested).
Everyone knows when the vulnerability windows are.
If the attackers show up in the next window, once they fire on the Citadel or any defender, they are free for all. All your allies there can fire upon them, regardless of wardec status.
PS: Camping gates has no real benefit. You dont know where they will come from (unless its a bottleneck system, in which case the attackers can benefit from gate cloak anyways). No bubbles in HS, so no way to hold them there to receive gate fire. Far better to simply gather around and protect the Citadel itself for the duration of its vulnerability.
Merc corps will blow anything up ,
they will only blow up the specific stuff you’d like them to if you pay them
1 Like
I did carry that sentiment.
1 Like
oh i know, far be it from me not to jump down your throat over something minor though 
Whats your view on Citadels being aggressible to the result of a suspect tag?
1 Like
hmmm im not all that into it tbh,
im not specifically against it now mind but i think war and by extension crimewatch all need a look at serious and encompassing look at.
agressing real assets i.e. structures/poses and such should need a war imo but ill conceed that wars need work, so i dont think its all that helpful to try and seperate these out as no one element of the fucky mess of empire is going to be “fixed” in isolation.
my point is that if we can get wars with more inherent engagement then that would solve (or at least go some way twords a solution for ) the root issue and we would have more things going boom
But wouldnt being able to aggress a Citadel without a CONCORD reaction, but rather a suspect flag, increase aggression in HS?
It might but then again it’d feel kinda bullshite in exactly the same way nutral logi does.
You don’t know it’s there, you don’t see it and you can’t do anything about it until it’s committed.
In highsec you’re supposed to file your paperwork first, they’re supposed to have 24h notice that something like this is coming.
Yeah, but on the otherhand it would mean everyone else can aggress the attackers, without wardec or CONCORD response.
Yeah but this is highsec, not lowsec.
3 Likes
This is especially true with upcoming changes. Say I have a refinery in an icebelt system with no station. I may keep the refinery module offline except when needed. With current war Dec mechanics, I get 24 your notice to make sure it is fueled. Under a suspect system, I need to keep the citadel fueled at all times or I could lose a timer.
1 Like
Two with the new changes
Nhgghh.
Sorry, but that might not be a bad thing, especially considering refineries in Ice systems, which are in huge demand.
PS: Static Ice field systems is a fail. They should be randomly spawned throughout EVE.