EVE Information Portal

There aren't enough mercs in all of highsec to field 200 battleships at one time. And that would be only to contest an undefended tower, not one that was actively defending. Only the large nullsec/former nullsec groups can bring the number of players required.

I have no problem with players being forced to put something on the table to contest them (like capitals), but whatever the value of that force is, it has to require less than several hundred players to accomplish. A single player should not be able to put up a tower that is all but immune to the combined efforts of less than 200 other players.

This actually raises a good question. A Large is able to house anything that can *currently* fly in highsec space, so why should an XL be put up at all ( or allowed ). Similarly unless you are flying a Super/Titan in J space, a L is capable of everything you want.

You are correct that they will be considered pretty much permanent structures in Highsec. The only reason low/null are different is the level of teamwork between corporations. Highsec alliances ( wardec alliances exempt ) are not utilized as well as low/null alliance/coalitions. Nerfing the structures so small Highsec corps can kill them is not as good of a solution as not allowing XL structures in highsec ( which also eases that most AoE weapons that aren't allowed in highsec anyway could only be installed in an XL )

Have we confirmed that XL will not be restricted in their placement yet? It seems as though they are the equivalent replacement for outposts, and current outposts are not allowed in the areas of space being debated. Did I miss something?

What powers the new citadels? Can a citadel go offline? Can offline citadels be destroyed by damaging only hull HP? If a citadel is offline, can we hack the citadel to recover it for ourselves by either shipping it away or installing it over again as our own?

I believe it has been made clear that you will be able to scoop the structures, but you will lose the rigs which will make up the bulk of the cost and provide the bulk of the bonuses if you do so.

Seems fair to me. If you want the flexibility of dodging a wardec, you just don't install rigs. If you want those bonuses, you have to commit to defending. Worst case though, if real life keeps you away, you just lose the structures and the rigs and your assets are magically teleported somewhere safe.

The problem regarding XL's in lower class Wormhole systems could easily be resolved by making the initial construct needed to deploy the XL Citadel (Egg? Citadel scaffolding tingie?) so big it could only be carried around in a Freighter. If at the same time CCP chooses to only allow those things to be made in existing stations and/or allready deployed XL Citadels, the problem you stated will never occur.
In that case it would not be forbidden to deploy XL's in lower class Wormhole systems, it would just be technically impossible.

edit: No special cases, just Volume = *insert ludicrous number here* (750.000 m3 Packaged)

Another thought occured to me, if the XL citadels required capitals to destroy them they would need anti-capital weapons to defend themselves in any reasonable manner and as far as I have read the biggest nastiest weapons will be non-empire space only, potentially another reason to limit hisec to large stations.

I say potentially as I'm still undecided on that one. A single player is unlikely to invest in an XL simply due to the fuel logistics to get the benefit from it. They would also be in real trouble trying to defend such an investment alone.

So after reading a bit, it seems people are concerned of the self defensive options available on the citadels. I think it is important to be able to fit guns or some form of EWAR on it. The thought of a false sense of security is kind of true and should somehow change.

The problem with the false sense of security is that the guns are effective and maybe too effectuve against a single target but ineffective against a large force. The common idea is to make guns more powerful against targets and kill them faster but that would make them overpowered. My though is to have turrets with an AoE or semi-AoE type turrets/mods.

So the immediate thought is that AOE will hit everything within the blast radius, but there is an obvious problem with that - its kind of OP. If it is possible, then it should be more like a Flak cannon or shotgun blast; Things in the area of the target have a chance of being hit, but will not always be hit like a smartbomb or bomb. Like every gun, the turret will have a sig limit on it so smaller ships take less damage, or maybe can dodge it, but larger ships can be hit more easily but take damage as if it was a smaller ship shooting it. This would scale from S to XL turrets where Small turrets would be good AA vs frigs and fighter/fighterbombers but limited damage vs Battlecruisers and XL would be effective against capital ship clusters but ineffective vs smaller but can *rarely* still hit smaller targets.

One issue people have with these would be if like current POS mechanics, you would need to shoot them. I think rather than remove the entosis links from the new Citadels would be to use the entosis links to disable or take control of the hostile turrets. Instead of splitting damage you can focus your damage on the target and incap turrets at the same time.

• Make turrets useful vs fleets
• Make turrets not overpowered against single targets
• Disable turrets while being able to target the primary objective or targets of importance

These, combined with the other proposed idea I had of a minimum DPS before the repair timer is paused/reset would work in conjunction.

One more thing I want to add is that I really really want the citadels to EVOLVE. That means, observing how players use them and make small changes to them like maybe in the future, their evolution would lead them to be able to jump or move around. Begin with inter-planetary movement, have a citadel move to a strategic point in the system like a gate when you think an enemy fleet is coming (with a long spool up timer and a slow ass warp), then after half a year or year evolve the navigation component of the structure to jump. DO NOT ADD NEW FEATURES TO REPLACE THEM, JUST EVOLVE THEM.

20 players shooting the structure for 10+ hours, where likely any break in the application of damage (like downtime) results in the structure becoming invulnerable again (as the vulnerability window will close) is not a viable attack strategy either. No one will do that. And have to do that 3 times in a row to destroy it?

It is just too many player hours. There needs to be a way for less players to attack in reasonable time, even if they have to use more expensive equipment. No group can commit 200+ player hours (x3) of time for attacking something which drops no significant reward so they never will be attacked. That, or don't put them in highsec/wormholes.

You are saying again and again that no one will do it. Who considers necessary to destroy the asset will look for a way to do it or will fail trying.

Just go and attack targets that you are willing to engage and leave the rest alone. Not everything in the game must be a toy for you to play with.