EVE General Discussion

There are NPC stations, and two Astrahus in the system. I have no plan to force out anyone else, the Citadel and EC's are for my alliances use only. No it is not a HS island

Just remove it all together, would be my preference (not that it's worth much).

From recollection, that was the initial intention, but was changed after concern that people would just store assets in NPC stations, particularly in null; and that citadels would just become a bit of a white elephant.

The answer is to just remove NPC stations too from null.

The lack of asset safety in j-space hasn't stopped Citadels from being used and as we often prefer convenience. Despite all the claims to the contrary, assets would be stored in Citadels in null regardless because it's just much more convenient to have ships ready at the place you want to play.

That would provide a bit more motivation to defend assets; and if people leave the game and don't first take care of ensuring their assets are going to be safe while they are away from the game, then bad luck. That may be a bit harsh though. Perhaps it should be possible to move assets to a safety mechanism and pay the cost up front (rather than on the back end to reclaim them as the current system). CCP mentioned the possibility of NPC Freight services early on in the citadel devblogs, so if a player manually moves their assets into safety and pays a 'courier' fee, all good, but otherwise, assets not already in safety are lost in a Citadel, and should drop along with everything else. That way, players that take a bit of care and responsibility gain an advantage over others that don't. That seems far more EVE like.

Would be a good change in my view, but not likely to happen. I also agree with your view on rigs. There were a few people that tried to express that before Engineering Complexes were released because industry is fundamentally different from pvp, in that the game is often about achieving maximum efficiency and not compromising; whereas pvp fits are always a compromise.

The whole 'efficiency first' game is naturally going to lead to a proliferation of Citadels/ECs in order to make all aspects of industry play efficient, because no one wants to sacrifice rigs when changing processes.

Citadels especially in hi-sec are squishy. Why would I put my stuff in a Citadel in hi-sec if when destroyed I lost my goods or even a percent of goods?

I wouldn't. No one in their right mind would.

They would then only use Citadels for processing minerals and freight it between NPC stations. Or have to ferry all their goods out after they get the 24 hour war-dec notice but that would then pose the question why bother keeping them in the Citadel in the first place.

And markets. So why would I put my stuff for sale in a Fortizar in hi-sec if I stood to lose my goods if the patron who owned the Citadel got attacked.

There's zero sense in it. It would make Citadels redundant and effectively mineral-processing platforms.

As the owner of the Citadel I lose a lot when it dies. I lose the rigs, the Citadel itself and there's considerable expense in operating the Citadel.

As a user of the Citadel I don't have any asset-risk. But if I did have asset-risk I simply wouldn't use it. I wouldn't need a Citadel. I would use an NPC station.

1 ISK would be pointless. A random item could be problematic. I have some expensive implants stored at mine. And what do we qualify as a random item. Would that include a ship?

Or mathematically, would I keep 500 separate stacks of 1 piece of Antimatter Ammo so the probability of me losing something good is reduced?

Asset-protection could for purpose of 'narrative' be considered a kind of insurance. Perhaps if a user rented space in a Citadel that would make sense and a revenue for Citadel owners. So they have a cost investment.

As the owner of the Citadel, you are responsible for its protection.

As a user of the Citadel, you are responsible for your own risk invested in it.
If you choose to use a Fortizar for storage or trade, you do so as a means of benefitting from the Fortizars beneficial trade rates as applied ro you with preferential standing, which are better than in a NPC station.
Noteworthy that if you chose to use the structure as a jump clone option, ypu will lose that clone with no recourse for recovery, shpuld the structure be destroyed. (You can however simply fly tye clone out during invulnerability windows).

The 1isk, and 1 lost item, is an example to illustrate the difference between 100% free and 100% safe, and risk.
I specifically said the degree ot that is up for argument.

Asset Safety is not "a kind of insurance". It is free, magical and entirely safe.
If Asset Safety cost the 15% of value by rote, that would constitute insurance, and I would be satisfied by that.
(Noeworthy, however, that some items are unpriceable)


Thank you, and I agree. Discussion on yoour part and others has been civil, ontopic and constructive.

I guess my question is what conditions would need to occur to make asset-risk viable for citadels given their current status as a soft-target?

I watched 1 guy and his alts put one in hull with a 1 week timer, wtf is that about? I thought we were suppose to get away from reinforce timers not make them even longer.

On top of the fact for some stupid reason ccp took away all of the standing requirements and I haven't seen the answer they had for why they did it, so everyone that wanted a pos could put one up and now everyone that wants a citadel can put one up with 0 work.

I think for the most part you are correct, particularly the part about lack of reasons to war dec. I think a small percentage of risk to assets otherwise protected by asset safety (sticking to 5% for simplicity's sake, but it's arbitrary) would be OK for assets though, particularly if the money you make selling goods in a Citadel as opposed to a NPC station made you an extra 5% per month. Over the course of a couple of months one would expect an industrialist to make enough extra profit that it totally mitigates any small percentage of loss upon Citadel destruction. however, and particularly for higher traffic Citadels, the longer they sit out in space the more valuable they become as total assets in the station continue to grow. I'm suggesting that that extra ISK could GIVE reasons to go to war (even more so the longer the station is in business.

The lazy way to basically do the same thing (increase incentive to destroy Citadels) would be a silent charge of some amount per market transaction (say 0.1%) and let that accumulate into an NPC faction (pirate NPCs or whatever) and as that ISK accrues it increases the drop of "Citadel tags" or something like it that you can sell back to the pirate NPCs or whomever.

That wasn't the best way to explain what I'm trying to say probably, but hopefully you understand what I'm going for, there.

People need to use the correct terms, there are Citadels and there are Engineering Complexes, the Engineering Complexes have specific industrial related bonuses and even weaker defences with increased vulnerability timers, facepalm on that part....

Astrahus 25% bonus to all combat rig effects and 25% reduction in Citadel service module fuel consumption

Costs 1.1bn in minerals and P4

Raitaru 1% reduction in Manufacturing job required materials, 15% reduction in manufacturing and secience job required time, 3% reduction in manufacturing and science job required ISK cost and 25% reduction in Engineering service modeule fuel consumption

Costs 554m in minerals and P4

The manufacturing rigs are so much more expensive then the combat rigs when you compare the base material costs, I looked in Amarr and found that the combat rigs sold for around 240m and looking at the raw material costs of the production rigs I would expect they will be around 320m to 470m each, these do not drop by the way as you likely know.

The modules cost 220m for the manufacturing and research ones and 280m for the cloning and they do drop as do the fighters, ammo and defences which are not that cheap.

Stepping back on that a bit, I just cannot see that it is worth my while setting up one of these immensely easy to kill things with that amount of cost, and this is why you will not see an explosion of these things in hisec except near the main trading hubs and even then traders don't like the fact that they have their stuff impounded for a period of time, you ignore that issue too.

If they put on a long job with lots of materials and they get a war dec and the citadel destroyed all that material is lost, it does not drop either, CCP should change that part by the way...

The asset safety helps industrial players in the sense that the small amount of items in a Raitaru that they might use will be safe, big deal not, but I noticed that the items in Corporate hangers seemed to have dropped on a Raitaru in Perimeter, was that a bug or the fact that stuff does drop?

I find this entire thread a bit of a whine without thinking it through, for hisec in terms of the ones that matter the Raitaru the asset safety means nothing because who will keep stuff in them apart from what you use to manufacture and no one with any sense will use originals, the value in these things apart from the rigs all drop nd are worth it.

I did this exercise because I was actually looking to see if it was worthwhile setting up such an industrial empire and my conclusion is that it is not. I will not be doing this and I do not expect any small indy players to do it either. I am seeing quite a few Raitaru's getting attacked in hisec because they are loot pinatias if properly set up and you can expect more and more players to attack these things because they are easy and they drop expensive stuff. All the war decker has to do is find out if the Raitaru has anything in it which is easy because CCP made them change their appearance slightly to show what is fitted, clap clap CCP.

So my conclusion is that this thread is a baseless whine and any small time indy player should not bother because it will not stay up long enough to recoup the expenditure, so no limit in the number in a system should happen, especially as the content of wars around the trade hubs is actually interesting apart from the combat itself because they are so damn weak in hisec.

I am sorry to be so forceful, but I looked at this with the intent to build some my self and I just cannot see that it is worthwhile in any sense.

EDIT: It looks like a number of people are not bothering with the Raitaru and using the Astrahus, though the defences being better is still relative, they just suck slightly less than the Raitaru.

Thank you for that, it certainly was a surprise to me that stuff dropped that one would think would be covered by asset safety, but that would make sense, personally I would let that continue to drop as should the raw material in unfinished jobs.