Wednesday, November 11, 2015

Citadels and FW

CSM heroine Sugar Kyle has a thread running on the forums regarding Citadels and Faction war here.

Its going to make things interesting. Even for those of you who don't FW, you are probably aware anyway that low-sec stations have a 'lock out' mechanic for us militia members. I cannot dock in any NPC stations in Gallente Militia or Matari Militia held systems as I'm Caldari. If I want to dock in say Nisuwa for example, the Caldari or Amarr militias would need to capture the system or I'd need to drop faction war.

Capturing a station system that is home to an active corp is a big undertaking. As you fight for control the holders can simply reship back in station. The invaders either have to fly or pod/pod express back to their station in another system or set up a POS and load it with fitted ships. If you set up a POS then it's vulnerable to attack and your haulers and indy alts bring stuff there are at risk. It creates great fights but the invaders will be still at a disadvantage.

However, citadels could change all that. What if we placed a Citadel in Nisuwa? We could do it ourselves or use an alt to sneak it under the radar whilst setting it up. Then we could stock it with lots and lots of fitted FW ships. Then invade.

Suddenly the QCats and the other Gallente Corps there would not have the home-field advantage. It would be a level playing field. Or would it be? If our citadel was destroyed out "Stuffz" would be space-magicked away. If we won, the Gallente would be locked out of their station and need alts to recover their items. You could say there are advantages to the invaders in that respect.

Looking at their other advantages we would have them too. We could reship as quick as them. With a clone bay installed we could clone as quick as them. Then we can start camping them in their own system. If they try that with us, our citadel defenses will screw them over.

Suddenly it's hard to hold any system.

A few ideas have been raised to stop this.

Tie Docking Rights of all Structures into Sov.
This is an obvious one. If you cannot dock in the NPC station the enemy hold, you cannot dock in a citadel anchored in the system. This would give the 'home-field' advantage again but also create a big problem. With POS retired you wouldn't be able to have even a staging POS so taking a well defended system would be near impossible.

You cannot anchor a citadel if you don't own the system.
Similar to the above. Easy to get around. Drop it with an alt and allow docking rights for your militia.

I'm not sure there is an answer to this. So far we've not seen a suggestion that wouldn't break something else.

So are we going to see the end of the "fortresses". Station systems held by one Militia for years as it is almost impossible to take from them? When I was in the QCats we referred to "Fortress Nisuwa" and "Fortress Nennamalia". Strategic systems that were very difficult to take given the distance from an enemy station, home to active corps and the fact invaders had to rely on a POS to resupply which required a lot of logistics to keep the fight going. Given the way plex fights are, you need a lot of ships!

Post Citadel expansion will we just drop a Citadel and be able to take systems much easier? Will NPC stations actually fall out of favour given issues with docking rights in enemy held systems and that if your citadel is lost your 'stuffz' is magically transported where you want it?

At the very least the map is going to be re-wrote. Forget the popular NPC station systems, you could make any system your home. Set up buy orders to encourage industrialists to come and stock up your war machine. Move your forward operating base right up to the enemies front door. Want to base out of Kedama? You might be able to after Citadel launches next year.

As it stands at the minute FW is going to to be massively shook up by the introduction of citadels and nobody can predict whether this will be good or bad!

Repeat of the link to the forum thread here if you have any bright ideas.


  1. I'm not in faction warfare so maybe this comment is simply off the mark. Hopefully its not.
    From my perspective a “neutral” corporation that sets up a citadel in gallente space and allows Caldari Militia access is a collaborator of the enemy and is therefore treated as such. I don't know if there are any penalties tied to citadels coupled with FW mechanics but there surely could be some right?

    If a neutral places a citadel in FW space he can either obey the rules of the owner and only allow owning militia (or exclude all militia) and wouldn't have to care about it again, it will just auto adjust if ownership switches.
    Or the citadel owner decides to pick side for one (or all) of the Militias which will tie vulnerabilities to the system index, if it is hostile your fighting windows increase (to which extend I don't know). That would allow to replace the staging POS but increase the risk to loose the Citadel. As they aren't that cheap I think we can strike a balance here and CCP can modify it if needed. A bit more vulnerability time or less. Maybe even new AI patrols attacking or supporting an attack on the citadel?

    Maybe the allow and disallow militia forces needs some “overwrite” of safety protocols of the citadel causing it to take 48h and alarming the system owner. After all in Sov 0.0 owner gets a mail if a POS is anchored, would be useful for FW guys to know when new citadels support their enemy.

  2. Don't citadels get a bonus that is tied to Sov? The same mechanic could work in faction war. If you lose your Sov, your citadel could become less efficient or other penalties, making it difficult to live out of/easier to destroy.

    If you want to anchor one, there could be on lining penalties and limited functionality until your faction gains Sov.

  3. As it is defending a system seems a little too easy atm. I'm looking forward with excitement to what Citadels will bring to the warzone, as well as what they will change within it. It may be good or bad, but I doubt it will just be business as usual.

    - Than