War Never Changes


When I first ventured into the future of wardecs with my article Citadels: Rebalancing the wardec system, I had envisioned that their addition to the game would change wardecs, and so I explored some of the problems with those mechanics by forming the WarDecProject. Until EVE:Citadel is fully released these problems remain. However, recent changes to the  watchlist, increased NPC market taxes, jump freighter hull bonuses, as well as restrictions for weapon-systems and Citadel-fitting in highsec, result in a cloudy future for wardecs and all of those involved. Citadels of all sizes will be able to make use of the new fighter squad features, even in highsec, which will likely see them used as training grounds for carrier pilots learning the new controls. War has been nuked, without CCP ever mentioning it. Time to come out the cave and evolve.

The Idea of War

When you boil it down, the purpose of wardecs is controlled destruction of player assets . Under the current stagnant system, more experienced players have been able to manipulate this mechanic, along with other features – like the watchlist – to such effect, that many wardecs would result in targets simply not logging on, resulting in no kills for either side. It even turned trade-hub wardeccing into camping – the current mechanics support this as almost the only valid way to conduct a wardec at the moment. Aggressors don’t need to go after their content, it will come to them eventually. Many “great whales” are taken down on trade hubs, with zero CONCORD intervention.

No content is bad gameplay though.

While most might have made use of the watchlist to monitor and avoid the attackers, not everyone did, and that resulted in wars spanning systems, and individuals being hunted whenever they logged in. Now wardecs have been set on a new path that raises concerns about their future execution.

Know Thy Enemy

When conducting wars, it is common to first gather intel; made easy by tools such as EVEwho and the recently removed in-game watchlist. The trick was to add every player from your target group to your watchlist – mine was filled and emptied many times over. You would send this as a mail to your entire corp. This reduced your chances of missing any PvP content if all targets were on your watchlist. Should your opponent have any POS or POCOs deployed, they will most likely be in a system with active players, also they are tied to moons or planets and never hard to find.

Locator agents would then help you find any players who were online, with a simple tick in a box, and often led you to their structures if they had any. That mechanic is so deeply tucked away inside of EVE that I think defenders are often unaware of it. You really have to be a hunter or PvP-focused to know about those agents, CCP don’t make it very clear that they exist. Just another one of those loose ends probably left after a day of rampant feature development that just sort of ‘stuck around’.

The in-game channel “locates-r-us” provides a fixed fee service to run a locator on anyone, so the attacker doesn’t even need standings with any locator agents himself. They could be anywhere in space, and had multiple locators running at once, all based on their watchlist and the online-only filter.

Seasoned defenders may never visit the system(s) containing their structures during a war and created their own watchlist, which – in many cases – is much smaller than the attacker’s version. Yet, many still try to carry on their activities as normal.

A defender going to a structure where they have clear investment in, will always be attractive to an attacker. Those carebears just can’t stay away for one week. Still, sometimes creating reinforcement timers is the best way to provoke some PvP engagement.

When a corp suffers a lot of losses during a war, it tends to attract future wars. If your war history shows lots of boring wars with very little activity, that makes you less likely to get agressed in the future. The watchlist as it stood worked both ways, both parties could always remain anonymous to each other. In this manner, the war could blow over without any engagement. Simply by being aware you have X enemies online can dictate what your most likely course of action will be. A quick look at your attackers killboards can show you how active they are and in which systems.

War was too easy to avoid and dismiss. Now it will be on your doorstep.


Goodbye Watchlist. Hey Buddy List

The removal of the watchlist feature from the game is changing the playstyle for all future wardecs and for the casual HS corp member. Undocking in New Eden has never been 100% safe, but this should embolden defenders. The fact that you can not be added to a watchlist is pretty much a safety feature for them.

Players who only get to play for a few hours each night – enough time over the month to PLEX the account maybe, or they work full time jobs – are no longer going to be targeted as soon as they log in. They were most likely the players who didn’t even have the enemy on their own watchlist anyway, which lead to terrible PvE ship losses and diminished morale.

The watchlist has now become become a buddy list, and players may choose to mutually accept seeing each other online. This won’t be participants in a war dec, that’s for sure.

Citadels: Spaceship Death Stars Everywhere

Clearly, the current focus of CCP is on capitals and structure playtesting. Engaging the players on such a huge overhaul has been taking up a lot of developer time. The restrictions applied to highsec will make these structures intimidating and resilient to anything but an all out extermination fleet. Without the use of DD’s, AoE weapons, capitals or MJFG’s, a highsec Citadel becomes a different kind of Death Star. In time, the war dec system will evolve into an even more specialist role, where numbers will matter more.

Citadels have to be anchored at least 500km from any celestial body (belt, planet, etc.), but this is still larger than their max locking range (as confirmed by CCP on twitter). All Citadel sizes will be allowed to use the new fighter squads, even in highsec space. Fighters can’t warp to a target or follow a target into warp, and will use the new “RTS” controls. Considering the size of some Citadels, this could make the placement of fighter launch bays an important fitting choice for owners. In addition to that, they can use other weapons systems and modules in their defence, making these structures some of the most powerful player built weapons in the game; and you can sit in the driver’s seat! Currently Citadels can be built at starbases, eventually these structures will be removed; increasing the industry demand in already deployed Citadels.

Wardeccers futures will essentially focus around Citadels as a primary structure. Perhaps not with the intent of removing the structure, but to find some war targets and possible content. As these structures grow in strength and use, they will become more attractive as war targets. Player investment in defending will be increased if they have manufacturing jobs in progress since input material can drop as loot, even if your BPC’s and personal assets are safe.


The first Citadel killmails will likely be in lowsec, null and WH’s. These will be “easier” structures to take down than any highsec Citadel. They have defences available to them, but there are also more powerful offensive modules that can be used against them than in highsec.

Regardless of where they are deployed these structures will attract spaceships like moths to a flame. The content surrounding Citadels will escalate while players figure out the optimal combat strategy; either way all that will remain is a mass of wrecks.

Citadels: The Great Migration

There will come a time when CCP has to make some tough decisions about removing NPC stations and pushing players into Citadels. If these stations remain, players will simply stay there to avoid any chance of asset recovery fees or delays in releasing their assets. How can CCP do this and maintain a working lore perspective? We are often offered more player events and the perfect option in my mind would be a massive Drifter incursion to start attacking NPC stations. Dealing with their own internal defences and systems, the Factional Warfare alliances of old could simply dissolve, bringing us four-way Factional Warfare. An overnight change in politics which would result in years worth of player content and sandbox resculpting. Perhaps any displaced mission agents could be offered offices in the new player-built Citadels, although it is likely that we will see more NPC Citadels to house these mission agents.

At the moment CCP are trying other things, like increasing NPC market service fees in an attempt to make Citadels more attractive to players. The substantial change here is sure to have its own unforeseen impact. I am not a market analyst, but the construction cost of Citadels is not that far beyond many player’s affordability already. As a result, capsuleers are going to be more involved in the future landscape of New Eden. Medium Citadels are designed to be used by solo players and small corps, and this will encourage a surge of deployment all over highsec. How many will it take for regions/constellations to have mass limits applied for deployment? This cap could be the only reason the wardec system will carry any value in the future.

If the systems are not capped on mass deployment then they could be limited on fitted modules/services that can be deployed by players. At the time of writing no hard caps have been declared by CCP though.


War Decs Evolved

“The actions of a single player resonate throughout the entire gameworld, what matters most is that the experience was emergent, unscripted; because in the sandbox, all player actions – no matter how subtle or bold – always have an impact.” – A line from the Butterfly Effect video that I felt was appropriate.

Going forward with Citadels, wardecs are not on CCPs roadmap. Maybe they don’t think it has to be, and that the destruction economy will carry on as normal, or they can already see a future of more explosions. Yet we still have new features, removed features and more to come that will affect wars in the future. The outcome of those changes will take some time to evolve in HS space, and CCP can only be in development of so much at any given time.

Adapt Or Die

When executing wardecs in the future, you should be prepared to face a Citadel. The wardec system has not changed, but that has not stopped other changes having a clear impact on it. Gone are the days of solo wardecs to kill a few indy ships found on your watchlist. Was trade hub camping your thing? They won’t need to come to that station any more with markets in their own Citadel or nearby. You will have to go after your content.

The best opportunity to get ship kills will be in close proximity to a Citadel and the gates in system. Tethering and Citadel defences all support the defenders claim on the grid in an impressive way, there is no reason for defenders to fight elsewhere. The size of a wardec fleet will need to be able to handle the DPS of the Citadel as well as its defenders, while bringing enough firepower to speed up the process of reinforcing the structure and enough DPS to reach the Citadel’s damage mitigation limit. At this damage cap an assault should only take about 30 minutes.

There are more changes to come from studying the CSM summit minutes before the full impact can be measured. An increased max targeting range for ships has been suggested, but not beyond a Citadel’s weapon range. That will provide more scope for engagement. Then there is Fozzie’s planned changes to force boosters on-grid, which could make these ships a primary target for Citadel defenders, when they are brought in to support attacking fleets.



Tribal Wars Or Citadel Cartel

The prospect for a player group to control a highsec “Citadel Cartel” has been suggested, but this is just speculation. If players don’t use the cartel’s markets, how will this cartel ever get formed? The only option is open competition. As large as any group may get, it wouldn’t take long for an individual to set up a market and start messing with your carefully crafted empire. To stop them it will take a war. A considerable investment in besieging the competition, which could be tens of different groups.

Without a mass cap on structure deployment, I can’t see the cartel option becoming possible. Large areas of null are blue to each other, with agreements not to attack each other’s structures. While this agreement works out there; highsec space is entirely different. Wars will be more localized and competing Citadels provide more than just a speedbump to the invasion power large blocs may have in highsec. If you are targeted however, the destructive power they can bring will be just the right amount to level your Citadel – eventually. They will also have to use the wardec mechanics. Something many of them don’t even understand, having spent so long in null surrounded by blues.

Maybe the  “Voltron” which highsec “carebears” could form if these bloc power wars start landing could result in the expected cartel the blocs want to control.

The reality is that null will be busy dealing with null, while highsec is being fought over by hundreds of different corps with different interests and goals. Citadels will be much tougher in highsec, but not immune to war, or beyond the gaze of envious eyes.


Citadels will be at the core of the wardec system. Large and XL Citadels fitted with market hubs will appear in the market data so there is very little need to scout for assets to attack. Some may attempt to set up a cartel and use 0% market taxes as incentive, but they will require the military might to maintain that stance. Locator agents will continue to be used – even without an “online” list – helping identify systems where players may have medium Citadels.

I’m currently of the opinion that highsec Citadels are going to be pretty difficult to remove but not impossible. I’m not a big fan of how POSes litter highsec but they are tied to moons for deployment, whereas Citadels can be deployed anywhere in systems that allow their placement. By the time we come to realize the extent of this unlimited deployment, systems may be way beyond saturation.

My prediction is, that wardeccers will become siege experts, future wars will involve more ships and more structures, and the economy will boom in an impressive fashion. All of this has put a spanner into the works of the WDP – which was always addressing old issues with the wardec system – but our sandbox has just been hit with a wrecking ball, and I worry CCP are not finished yet.

Tags: citadel, Jason Quixos, war decs

About the author

Jason Quixos

Jason Quixos has played EVE Online for just over 5 years. Having started in high sec with a successful war-deccing alliance, he has made several failed attempts at enjoying life in null sec. He currently has fingers in a few pies.

  • [SNIGG] Rocket X

    People still aren’t going to undock for wardecs. lol they’ll be like ‘OH GOD WE ARE AT WAR, LETS SEE IF ANY OF THE GUYS WHO DEC’D US ARE ONLINE, OFUCK WE CAN’T TELL’ and sit in station for eternity…

    • The mystery of space remains but with tethering it makes undocking perfectly safe for defenders. Some people just wont ever fight however.

  • Bill Bones

    I’ve been wardecced a few times. Since I don’t own any structure, I can avoid wardecs by just dropping my corp until the wardeccers grow bored. I have literally zero interest to give any money to CCP for PvP, and so being able to avoid PvP magnets such as player owned structures is essential to me.

    Shall CCP remove NPC stations, they will lose me as a customer, and probably a large protion of the 62% of EVE subscribers who never -or rarely- PvP.

    • Niden

      62%? Interesting. Is that from Quant statistics? I’ll wager that a lot of people have alts that never PvP, so the real number of actual players that don’t PvP is probably significantly lower.

      • Bill Bones

        As far as I know the number refers to subscribers, as in 62% of account holders do very little or no PvP with any of the characters in their accounts. So probably the number of people who only cares of PvPs is smallish, because as long as they PvP with one character in one account, that would counts as a subscriber who PvPs… even if he’s a ganked miner!

        Sometimes I wonder if CCP knows where does the money come from, what people pays for when they buy a EVE subscription. I doubt seriously that it’s PvP for anything else than a loud minority… the shiny, gold-plated top of the pyramid, to say so. But the foundation is PvE, and all the people who don’t give a rat’s ass of the structures being handed to the shiny top at such high development price (2 years and counting, probably 3 or 4 when CCP finishes).

        Think of it. Citadel for PvErs means… more taxes for NOT using them! That’s all what Citadels will bring to PvErs. Is this the way to treat the base of the pyramid? Toys for the aristocrats and taxes for the peasants…? (j/k) 😛

        • Zappity

          Reference please. You are building assumptions on what is possibly a false premise.

          • Bill Bones

            As far as I know the number was released during Fanfest last year, but now can’t point the exact source. Other CCP data point in the same general direction: EVE is a PvE game with a topping of PvP on it and PvE is not an ancillary of PvP, but the main reason to pay a subscription. Data from damage to NPCs versus damage to players, production of ISK vs destruction of ISK, the population of the massive battles of the past compared to the server population during those events, the way in which PCU reacts to PvE events like Blood Harvest or Frostline or even the fact that server population keeps going down no matter what CCP does for PvP whereas PvE gets the short end of the deal.

            With Citadel, CCP has bet on PvP and in my opinion that is a lost gamble. PvP alone can’t sustain EVE, and backburning PvE is costing CCP more server population than they can keep with new PvP toys. Module rebalancing, new ship classes, a new role for capitals, new structures to shoot at (compared to entosing them?), all bets are on PvP.

            And yet the server population goes down.

          • Niden

            Interesting points to be sure, I’d be keen to know what the reality is and have a discussion about it. However, a lot of people I’ve spoken to throughout the years say they do PvE to fund their PvP and that the PvE takes more time, which would explain the statistic. I mean a person might join PvP fleets on the weekends, but spend most of their time running missions in highsec on an alt or mining. I just don’t see the foundations of EVE being PvE. Perhaps I’m wrong, but I’ve not seen hard data to prove otherwise just yet.

          • Bill Bones

            Well, if someone holds two or three accounts and haves five or six characters and never does any PvP… that’s the kind of data we need.

            Yet as I said, many accidental data point that most EVE subscribers are not into PvP. And even if PvE is a way to pay for PvP it still would be the single most important thing since even PvPrs are doing it… and yet CCP can’t get their act together and take PvE seriously. Just look at Chribba’s PCU data. Last weekend bounced up right as The Hunt event started. PvP NEVER has done that for the game. PvP is the 80/20 of EVE, 80% of effort returns 20% of results.

          • Nou Mene

            I think the discussion is flawed. Why the need to separate PvE and PvP. I think (and i have no data) that the ppl that only PvPs or only PvEs is a small part, with probably changing parts that does and enjoys one or the other for the most part. I consider myself a PvPer but I still do a pretty healthy mount of PvE (mostly wh). If anything i would love PvP and PvE more ingrained together.

            Regarding wardecs. Two ideas come to mind.
            – Wardeccing corps banned from NPC stations. Assets locked in. And, or,
            – You can only wardec from an owned Citadel with a “tactical service” or something like that.

            The (my) idea is to make the offender always put something at risk. The “tactical service” would act as a passive added tax, you could cap the number of wars per fitted service, so the offender would have to gimp their citadel fittings and/or have more at risk.

            I always like this “soothsaying” articles and the discussion that emerges from them.
            Good job.

          • Kamar Raimo

            I agree on intuition alone that the majority of *accounts* in EVE are not used for PVP. That still begs the question how many of those are used to support PvP.

            That being asserted, I agree with you that CCP is spending too much time fixing first world problems while neglecting the basic flaws of the game, like crappy PvE

          • Bill Bones

            That woud be interesting. But I suggest you something first: Talk to PvErs. A lot of them. Look for them. Convo them. They dont hang out together. They don’t talk unless you ask them first. They stay low so PvPrs don’t notice them. And they stay low so CCP doesn’t nerfs them. PvErs are the cats of EVE.

            What PvPrs may think that they know of EVE and PvE is completely out of touch with reality, as dogs thinking of what means to be cat. A PvEr is not a PvPr in disguise. Is someone who lives and experiences EVE in a completely different way, without adrenaline rush, often without friendship, and always berated. A PvEr is someone who wants results, not uncertainty. Progress, not setbacks or waste of time. PvErs often are short of time, experience or ISK. They struggle for proficency, get the most of each minute they spend in EVE and not doing something else. PvP is a utter waste of time, and can’t be otherwise. Destroying a ship takes a fraction of what takes building it, thus kills are seperated by how much takes to ready the next kill… PvE is the opposite. Cheap and expendable, and reliable. Assured bang for your buck.

          • Kamar Raimo

            Well, I have known quite a few over the years, mostly in nullsec. I agree that it would be a good idea to talk to current ones to see whether and how things have changed, mostly in highsec.

            I wouldn’t compare them to cats though, because cats are actually predators. If there is an eve population I’d compare to cats then it would be frigate/cruiser solo PvPers.

            In any case, I do appreciate the response.

          • Bill Bones

            LOL. Cats kill 20 billion small bird and mammals each year in the USA alone. Yet nobody thinks of them as “dangerous” predators. Cats don’t kill people, right? Even dogs are better manslayers than cats!

            Similarly, EVE PvErs (who you easily disregard as predators) cause 68x more destruction than all PvPrs combined, and on top of that, are responsible for 80 or 90% of all ISK injection in the game.

            But they’re small and fluffy and oh how could they be possibly masskilling billions of little critters each year…?

            Biases are dangerous. “Meh, they’re only killing NPCs, thus, they pose zero relevance” Yes, but if they stopped killing NPCs, 80 or 90% of all money faucets in the game would vanish. Let alone consider the consequences if they stopped shooting those stupid rocks! 😉

            (Just for starters, you should stop doing glorious exhilarating PvP and should start doing EVE’s heinous PvE yourself, as many nullseccers have found to be a unwanted consequence of fozziesov and occupancy indexes)

          • Kamar Raimo

            Analogies will only take us so far, and while I would love discussing cats (I have two myself) I don’t think this will get us anywhere.

            As for the relevance of PvE as an ISk faucet, I don’t disagree (although I am not sure about the numbers you supply). Don’t get me wrong, I have no problem with people who favour a PvE lifestyle as such. I do have an issue with botters, AFK ratters and farming. In my ideal world, PvE would be engaging, rewarding and virtually impossible to farm. I have written a whole article about what I would see as a good way to achieve this right here (it was some time ago but its definitely findable).

            As for stopping my “glorious exhilarating PvP” and go run missions or sites instead, I am afraid that I don;t have the time for this. I am a very casual player these days, and I sure don’t want to spend my sparse in-game time with things that I have done many times over years ago. That’s the thing. I have just helped a newbie friend with her first steps into the game, and the content is in large parts exactly as it was 8 years ago when I started playing. Sure, there are Incursions, Burner Missions and other side features these days, but the PvE core has remained mostly unchanged for almost a decade. That is where a major part of the problem lies.

            CCP can do as much as they want with sov mechanics, if the PvE core remains boring, repetitive and inconsequential, the giant is standing on feet of clay.

            I do hunt clone soldiers BTW, mostly because I can use them to repair my PvP wrecked sec status and sometimes I get cool fights while out hunting for them.

      • ” 13.8% of players engage in PVP on any given day” CCP Quant at Eve Vegas. Not quite the same stat but illuminating nonetheless. See https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/eve-economy-update-eve-vegas-2015-report/

  • Rob Kaichin

    This is the article you posted so often about? Does it have a part 2? 😛

    “Fighters can’t warp to a target or follow a target into warp, ”

    When/where did CCP announce this? This could be it’s own issue with fleet tactics.

    • The link to the twitter convo above covers everything stated in that paragraph. Just have to view all conversation. Its going to be interesting using them from Citadels

      • Rob Kaichin

        The issues with the new fighters make new carriers deeply unattractive.

        The UI is cool, the usability is awful.

  • AkrasjelLanate

    “removing NPC stations and pushing players into Citadels.”
    They won’t do that don’t worry

    Wardecks are broken and im afraid it’s impossible to fix them… they will always benefit the attackers that deck corps that have no interest in fighting, that in most cases are simple griefer wardecks.

    • The cogs are already in motion to steer players towards citadel use over NPC stations. It will always be a personal choice to remain in this crippling financial state and your ships are still open to “station games”

      If you want to stay in a station that does nothing for you but tax you, go for it. The future of wars involves Citadels. War deccers will get a more interesting fight against a defender at a citadel.

      The game will evolve and those that refuse to move forwards become the bittervets.

      • AkrasjelLanate

        If you say soo 😉

      • Rob Kaichin

        It’s always nice to see a well-considered, neutral response.

        That wasn’t one.

        • I am not here to give neutral responses Rob. See it more as prophecy. The future is changing, and those who drag their heels will be left behind and feeling bitter.

          The potential for the war parties of current high sec to become sov holders with Citadels release, could make for a much more dynamic Sov map. This is a reality I foresee, and will hold my hands up if I am wrong.

          • Rob Kaichin

            “The potential for the war parties of current high sec to become sov holders with Citadels release”

            I can’t find it within me to describe the absolute non-chance that this will happen. Keep holding your hands up, you’ve already surrendered Vale.

            Besides, the exercise is good for you. Trim off that fat.

          • I didn’t own vale nor do I hold alligiance to any coalition. I will find myself a new home soon as I can log back in. The fact that vale with over 100 systems has been abandoned could easily make this another area like providence.

            Citadels won’t only support “new-bros” in sov warfare, and larger groups will become almost impossible to remove if they have condensed their “home regions” full of Citadels.

            What use is a TCU flip in this matter?

          • Rob Kaichin


            That…wait, yes, that certainly looks like you.

            But seriously, do you honestly consider the idea that ‘highsec casual player (who make up some part of the HS ‘war parties’) ‘ will become a null-sec sov holder likely? What do Citadels do exactly which will transform those casual HS players into NS players?

          • Mixing my characters current corp status for my stance or alligience in the game is a moot point.

            The staging power of a Citadel is enough to make some at least consider the possibilty of holding sov.

            I never stated that the “casual HS player” would be the ones looking to move to null, but that the war deccing parties might. I don’t consider them “casual HS players”

          • Rob Kaichin

            Let me guess, you’re playing the long con on the Bastion :P.

            My point was that both sides of the war dec are casual, or at least casual as compared to players from other areas of space.

  • Messiah Complex

    The problem with the war dec mechanic is that it’s absurd. The excuse of systematized bribery is entirely implausible, and that core defect has led to a shambles of arbitrary rules. You can’t fix something you can’t make sense of in the first place.

    What Eve needs is a set of mechanics that allow players to engage in criminal activity in spite of Concord, not in formalized collaboration with it. There should be a way for players to avoid detection when they commit a crime (and for that matter, there should be more crimes for them to commit). If Concord is nearly omnipotent now, that does not mean that it also needs to be omniscient.

    Someone else can come up with better ideas, but these will do go on with: (1) create a targeted module that prevents a ship from sending out a distress signal to Concord for a short period of time, and another module that gives a chance of resisting that disruption (similar to ECCM); (2) a passive FOF type module that allows “known” criminals to conceal their identities while in high sec; (3) a deployable structure and/or a citadel module that accomplishes one or both of the above within a certain radius; (4) identifiers on criminally looted items that make them impossible to sell in NPC stations, but not in citadels (at the citadel owner’s option).

    There are a ton of things CCP could do to allow for a robust, player-driven black market for the fruits of ganking, theft, extortion, etc. The advantage that type of system would have over the current war dec and crime watch systems is that it would actually make sense.

  • Pingback: New Eden Update – Monday 22nd March 2016 – Epp 175 | New Eden Update()

  • Druur Monakh

    “Maybe the “Voltron” which highsec “carebears” could form”

    Nope, won’t happen. This line of argument comes up every time hi-sec ganking is the topic, usually from the attacker’s side, yet over the years I have yet to see it happening on a grand scale.

    Granted, there are some corps which do find their calling in such an endeavour. But I consider those exceptions – most corps I can’t blame for turtling up: because doing otherwise is simply not worth the effort, in-game or out.

    And I have a feeling that Citadels won’t not just not bridge the gap, but possibly make it even deeper. Whatever the restrictions, non-PvPers will find some way around them to minimize their risk, and I would be surprised if “giving fights” were high on their priority list.

    Come to think of it… As it should be for what claims to be a ‘sandbox’.

  • Bozo

    EVE is not a PVP game, it’s a sandbox. PVPers are just more vocal, and better represented on out of game boards.

    Consider the following:

    The point of Crius was supposed to be giving an edge to those industrialists that were ready to move out of Jita. CCP caved in as usual so a lot of industry is still profitable in Jita, and only a big-time industrial can make a POS profitable, but still: the nice thing about a POS is that you can unanchor it and have it anchored somewhere else without too much hassle. Can this be done with citadels? I thought not. So industrial citadels become fat targets. Yay.

    Additionally, we keep reading wardeccers crying that their chosen targets would rather switch to yet another tax-evasion corp than “engage in PVP content” (read: get ganked). But why are the wardecced the only ones putting assets on the line? Highsec PVPers enjoy tremendous amounts of protection under the current rules.

    P I R A T recently lost a bunch of POCOs because they were lax, but had they taken the sort of precautions highsec #swag1337pvp wardeccers call for their victims to take, E-Uni wouldn’t have been able to strike back. Right now, wars are not symetrical: the wardeccing corp has no assets worth targetting, and its pilots will dock up or warp away if it looks they might scratch the paint on their blinged gankmachine, the only content they’re willing to provide being taunts in local.
    How about making it impossible to dock in an NPC station if your security status is too low, or your standing, or whatever? What if you can’t undock if you have initiated a war? Suddenly, Marmite can’t hide in Uedama, it has to dock up in a citadel, which people can attack. How about if you initiate a wardec, all the people you set +5 can suddenly get involved? They’re not automatically at war, but there’s an in-game mechanism for identifying them and going after them.

    • Your last paragraph contains some really good ideas and possible ways forward. What about a future that requires war deccers to actually own a Citadel with a war dec module?

      Once a war is declared this module spits out the notification as well as the location of the war dec module (Citadel) this would clean up many of the grief decs that are out there and sort the men from the boys in the war deccers attitude to their own potential risks involved with a war dec.

  • Pingback: CZ Minutes: The EVE Pyramid » Crossing Zebras – EVE Online articles, videos, news()