I go and play dust and of course IWS ruins the most epic awesome thread of the year by posting in it

Also no reinforcement timers will be here. CCP can give up dust if they do that and they wont they learned from nullsec already

As I said before it will have to be a persistant control model where by districts have a loyalty or alligiance factor the ticks up for whose in control of it. while ticking down for everyone else.

if not ccp is fail if they learned nothing from they way old fw was

I see nothing wrong with this,

A few quicks thoughts. Sorry if it has been mentioned before as this is a pretty long thread.

Outside of ideological reasons I think a lot of wars are fought over resources i.e you lack something you need or want something somebody else has.

Now to avoid nap fests going on too long you can limit the amount of resources that can be derived from a given district by gradually reducing the amount of it available until you hit a minimum baseline. This would result in a weakness that others can exploit, particularly if you link resource consumption to battles. The more fights in your district, even if you win, will result in repairs needing to be made and disruption to production. This could allow small corps or even individuals into Sovereign wars as they could be used for hit and run tactics, smash and grabs, and espionage to test out or even create instability into the system.

Also resource reduction will result in these static corps moving onto greener pastures. Once this district has changed hands the new corp could use new "methods" to gradually increase production to where it was before it gradually declines again.

With large corps employing small, deniable asset, corps in a low intensity war with sovereign nations will eventually lead to all out large scale conflicts because those nations will only see their resources being depleted through equipment loss etc. These small corps could also use low cost militia gear attacks with the intent to damage production and equipment with little Isk cost to them. This way the small corps can stay profitable because their costs are very limited and the big corp/nation can employ lots of them to attack districts etc.

Within district attacks you could even reduce it to attacking specific building e.g the building where the corp stores some or a lot of their tanks which could then be destroyed or even stolen, though more likely to steal dropsuits, weapons , modules or even the resource being produced.

I think it would be interesting to have specific skills available that would allow a player to increase resources that could be derived from that district making them particulary valuable to corps who want to hold districts even to the point of hiring them away from their current corps or skills like sabotage/high explosives to allow players to create a disproportionate amount of damage in sneak or hit and run campaigns.

Hopefully these possibilities would result in a more fluid battle environment.

It is a decent sized post with several points. Are you +1ing the whole thing or something specific?

Timers could be connected to the 'orbit' of your warbarge. Additionally, types of orbits that you choose ahead of time (or are even able to choose) would be based on other hostile district defenses, type of invading war barge, and location of the district on the planet.



Geosynchronous/solar synchronous - period of orbit corresponds to rotation of planet, mainly equatorial in inclination. Advantage: low energy, easy to predict timing, more distance covered. Disadvantage: shorter windows of time in each time zone, move distance (threats) covered.

Geostationary - no period of orbit, remains over one location. Time of attack could occur at any moment, vulnerable from district attack at all times.

Polar orbit - can be used to remain in one hemisphere all day and in half the time zones 2x each day. Inclination is perpendicular to equator.

Halo orbit - using other nearby objects along with organic propulsion for a customised orbit. Higher energy, but useful to precisely time exposure to a specific time zone. Minimal exposure to planetary counter attack.

Then you have other degrees of inclination and eccentricity, closed and escape orbits etc. That 'could' be an aspect of designing an attack; creating an approach for your warbarge that makes it least vulnerable to attack while it is stationing. You could justify a 'stationing' orbital approach as required due to the sensitive nature of nanite equipment and consciousness transferral synchronicity.

Most attacks could occur with a geostationary approach directly over a district, but if you had to stage a minimum of 3 hours ahead of time, that would mean your barge would have 3 hours it could be attacked from the district. Alternatively, you could choose from a customized variety of others to reduce your time over hostile districts, or the time your barge spends in outer-space vs. 'orbital/atmospheric space' vulnerable to eve pilots.