Well, the discussion about upkeep is a world of its own. Upkeep and active damage could probably coexist, but the fact damage is new can mean that upkeep costs can be further reduced and made more tolerable. Also remember the principle of "active duty" and associated potential damage could also probably be extended to other areas of the game, not just BGS and PP.
Proliferation or clogging is only part of the issue, although that would be relative to their impact in game more than the raw number of them. I think (I may be wrong) that the issue EVE devs saw with Titans probably has more to do with the principle of an asset with virtually zero, or very low, risk to be lost in the first place. That would indeed be a first in Elite FCs as no other player ship is invulnerable and no other ship exerts a game impact when you do not play.
Well, we are getting there to even more and more extreme edge cases. Devs could ensure a big flashy icon appears in front of the player to remind him/her etc
Jokes aside, the proposed system would reduce and mitigate most of those risks via several means:
- the proactive requirement for participation via flag activation (less prone to forget)
- The fixed time cycle (i.e. 1 week etc, which is decent time to remember if you forgot). Also if you FC is forced to emergency jump at the end of that week I am pretty sure you would notice
- The capped and limited consequences even if you forget (i.e. once your modules are down for repairs that is it, the FC is still non destructable) etc
Indeed, that would be part of the balancing and selection of the precise X%; but also, more importantly, part of the considerations and tradeoffs FC owners would need to decide on, fun!
Maybe. But if you think about it the proposal main fetaures use already existing game elements and principles. The dev and design work involved is not negligeable though and as
@Navigare Necesse Est says, we may very well be past the point FDEV can consider such a thing.