Warfare & Tactics

Fuel will be quite trivial in relation to the advantages of an effective station in hostile systems. Multiple stage viln windows will just attract massive fusterclucks in our warzone as squids batphone 3 or more large entities like they do for any other timer. Fw works best when its always on. The advantages of citadels are too great to have such an extended period of off each day.

Im not saying ccp are going to break from tradition and balance new features before they break aspects of the game with them. No, they will ignore all feedback, lose subs and then fix it never to regain the people that left, as per usual. Im just saying, as interesting as these new stations are, they are fundementally incompatible with fw as it stands. Importantly, incompatible with the single mechanic that has made fw so compelling for so many for so long.

Im sure there will be a period of flux where people are min maxing the use of these structures. But as andre has pointed out elsewhere, the min max of these structures is easy to predict in fw low sec and unless you are vesk and blinded by love, its hard to value a short term flux in experimental play over a long term healthy warzone.

Vesk sees a future where npcs do all the defending. I see a future where there multiple hostile citadels in every homesystem plexing them up out of their residents prime time leading to much greater need for dplex alts. Ive already seen it with posses, though i do pity anyone living out of a pos so i can accept that.

I still really like the idea of replacing ihubs with FW structures (Citadels) with 24/7 vuln windows that are immune until system goes vuln.

should have said without a RF timer as well.

I think you are projecting. People hate fighting me but they still come and do it in most busy systems.

If people fight in one warzone, but not the other, thats not indicative of broken mechanics. Just the outcome of a sequence of player decisions.

I didn't just mean the amarr minmatar front. I can sit in a home system for 20 minutes with no fight. And usually the fights don't even come from faction war guys. It comes from neutrals who just happen to come by.

I would love it if a csm would take note of the top weekly vp gainers killboard in faction war and ask ccp if that is how they intend FW sov to work. Because the way they dropped rollbacks and better intel tools, I am not sure if they really do intend it to be something you can do to farm lp with an alt.

They have had a bigger impact on occupancy than you have with your random pvp in your boosted garmur. Your saying their gaining vp means nothing for sov demonstrates your ignorance of the mechanics. The fact that everyone thought the extra point on the maulus was directed at faction war speaks volumes.

Anyway Crosi we all know you are fine with this situation. But few really care about our views. I would like to hear CCPs view on whether this is intended and they are fine with it.

I would not bet that these systems are all dead end or station-less. But even if they are they contribute to tiers and security. Oh yeah and when citadels come out it is unclear how important stations in a system are going to be. I haven't really thought it through yet, and we don't really have that much information to base predictions on.

I have never just fixated on the top three. Look at the top 20 or whatever you want. But look at the weeks over a period of time and look at their killboards for the times they get those top spots.

Sugar
Without understanding how these bonuses will work with the new 4 way war and with the "affiliated" alliances it is hard to really know what should happen. If CCP gives large enough bonuses it may lead to some neutral groups just flat out supporting the winning militia so their citadels owned by their militia alt corps get the benefits.

But I would say adding more consequences to a broken sov system does not make sense. Fix the sov war first. Then add consequences.

I think if you have a citadel in system a 100% bonus to your off grid links would be a nice idea.

I am sure everyone that posts in this forums section would agree.

Fuel costs have been mentioned a few times. +1 to those.

In sov null, sov owners have 15 minute structure repair timers, whereas deploying in hostile space is a full 60 minute time. In lowsec and WH space, this is 30 minutes. I'd love to see that 30 minute timer be reduced by 3 minutes per iHub upgrade level (thus, 15 minutes if you live in a fully upgraded home system), only for that militia. Mechanics like this would be difficult for neutrals to abuse by using one-man FW-alt holding corps (since it requires significant investment to keep a system upgraded, but is easy to degrade).

This would have multiple implications. The timer buff could be reduced to nil in as short as a few days if the system is being successfully hellcamped by the opposing militia, but would be easy to maintain if you have solid coverage on all the timezones. Neutrals interested in harming a FW citadel would then be encouraged to at least slightly work together with that citadel's enemies.

To avoid exploitation of upgrades in general (though not directly involved with the above suggestions):
-Any citadel placed by a non-FW entity should NOT receive any upgrade bonuses
-Any citadel placed by a FW entity should NOT be able to allow enemy militias to dock (full freeport mode in FW-systems would be impossible to own if the owning corp is in FW)
-Therefore, in no scenario can the ihub bonuses be used by the enemy militia.

This would prevent, for instance, Amarr players from using a Minmatar alt to anchor a citadel in a Minmatar system and letting Amarr use it, with full ihub bonuses, to siege the Minmatar system.

Edit: As corollary to the above anti-exploitation, there shouldn't be any standings penalties for shooting citadels owned by your militia, to avoid "standings-shielding" via FW holding-corps.

far too good extra 1% per level maybe

I like these ideas - basically it makes FW a sov system (which realistically it is), expands the vulnerability of citadels owned by folks that don't own the system sov (think that neutral citadels should have the same penalties). That accomplishes the same goal I was trying to hit - expanded vulnerability - while not needing NPC gimmicks.

As far as docking rights... I think citadels from one FW entity should never allow docking by opposed FW entities (which would be all of them). Neutral citadels should allow docking for whoever they please - but should have the same expanded vulnerability as any other non-sov holding entity dropping a citadel in space they don't own.