This will be the most easily defended structure, and have bonuses to office capacity and market functionality.

The intention is this is the best place to put all your stuff, hence it has the most fortress like appearance.

No definite price checks yet, but building an XL should have the same level of commitment as an outpost.

However, upgrading the thing with rigs is going to cost much more, since they're going to take over outpost upgrades / improvements.

Building and upgrading smaller structures will require far much less commitment and resources.

Reuse the impounding code that already exists. All your stuff back but some nasty tax. Like 25% of Est value.

We are going to allow you to fit manufacturing lines to citadels and refining to manufacturing structures etc. The base hull however will have bonuses to certain modules, so for industrialist who want to min / max a big operation then yes this is what they will be best to do.

Really good question, and we would love feedback on exactly how would be best to do this.

Maybe uninstalling upgrades and reprocessing them?

I think I'm right in saying that the 'Citadel' range of structures is just the first in a whole slew of structure ranges - the Citadel just happens to be the one optimised for Offices & Market and, most importantly, defence.

Not, at all. Sir. CCP Nullarbor asked for a means to facilitate reimbursement; therefore, I undertook to design a methodology that is fair, provides much requested potential content and may bring people back to the game. I spend a fair amount of time designing, rethinking, drafting and redrafting a workable solution to a complex problem and look forward to equally thoughtful feedback both from the community and CCP.

I very much look forward to suggestions on how to better refine and implement this idea, as I believe the eventual elimination of stations as we know them presents a unique opportunity for CCP to reengage older players that may not be as involved in Nullsec as they once were.

I dont think this is correct - the blog specifically stated that they are giving the towers defensive structures to ward of solo folk trying to reinforce towers.

It is the considered opinion of this author, a multi-year veteran of nullsec life, that Mr. Wolf is correct when he states there are inherent risks in nullsec, including risk of major or catastrophic loss. However, his repetition of this truism is utterly irrelevant, as is his tiresome reliance on the risk/reward analogy. Furthermore, his argument typifies the thinking that resulted in both the big blue doughnut and stagnation in nullsec that CCP has taken great pains to eliminate.

Yes indeed, however WH'ers do rather pose a different bag of cats, don't they?

Being online to defend is a very different beast in a wormhole where a mere two jumps away might cease to exist over the course of thirty seconds.

Null players can be ratting a few systems over, return to contest...WH'ers....yeah that's one HELL of a gamble.

The only common ground between null and WH, really, is the security status.


tl;dr: Null alliances living in the space stay in the zip code, the WH dudes cannot afford to even go out the front door for fear it locks behind them.


Edit: I'm also not too proud to concede I overlooked WH dwellers, however in a *SOV* rebalance I'm not that surprised. Mind you, looks like CCP are too, so I'm at least in good company.