Player Features and Ideas Discussion

With the upcoming removal of POSes, there is going to be a massive hole in the ability to deploy a fast short-term base of operations for small groups like incursion runners, mobile PvP and even larger scale deployment.

What I propose is a platform that deploys faster, like a POS, but with much more limited abilities than other platforms.


Basic idea is that this platform goes online much faster than the 24 hr base online time, that other platforms have. In return for rapid deployment, it has a a vulnerability window of 12-18 hrs per day, and only 2 defensive cycles ( the initial and a 2nd final cycle 24 hrs later).

Deployment time would be base 1 hr, plus 1 hr per ADM.

Med - cruisers and lower only
Large - up to BS and JFs
XL- up to small caps?

As for offensive functions, they are highly limited, 1-2 weapon slots, 1-2 utility mids , 1 low and no service slots.

This helps cover the gap that will be lost when POSes are no longer around. There are many reasons for something like this, and it would give a huge advantage to major offensive deployment, as they are vulnerable for large periods and much easier to destroy.

I'm not seeing a gap when POS go away. What is this gap you speak of?

You say there will be a gap, but what does that actually mean?

At a glance, no - based on you're vulnerability window. I don't think a forward deployment structure should have a vulnerability window. I don't see why an invading force should get a quick assembly structure that gets an invulnerability period. That seems kind of OP to me.

On a practical level, if you can remember back - the whole of the north got rolled in under a month and there were no forward deployment platforms. If SOV on half the map can be erased in a month (proven fact - no speculation here) I don't think there is much of a gap in Fozzie SOV. I don't recall POS structures being at all pivotal in the steamrolling of the north.

With enough ships and dedication anyone can be dunked in short order under current mechanics. The 'best practice' currently is to not fight and have CCP space pixies deliver all you stuff to Lowsex so you can reform and go fight on your terms.

A platform to make incursions easier to run..... uugghhhhhh. Like that needs to be a thing.

I believe the whole point was that you cannot instantly pop-up a base anywhere and then take it down the moment it is threatened.

That isn't the point of this, and even if it was threatened, it would be locked down, as aggression of a platform should reset it from unanchoring. This is meant as a way for smaller groups, planning short trips to have something to use as a minor base. Giving it limited offence, very limited defense, and limited docking makes it weaker than current POSes.

There are many reasons to have a base that can be moved in a reasonable amount of time and with limited function.

This would not be a "small citadel" as a citadel gets bonuses to combat rigs, and is designed for combat. This instead would be more like having a tent when hiking rather than building a cabin for every campsite.

Rather than trying to make life suck for every player, instead think of how something like this would make for a fairly easy kill if you bring 10-15 buddies.

Most platforms are designed as something far greater than what a POS is now, where as these would be more in line with the basic functionality of current POSes as forward staging points that can be removed just as easily as they are dropped. Though current POSes would actually be more powerful in combat than these are being proposed for.

Actually, what I am proposing, would have similar costs to most other platforms, rather than being cheaper, you pay for function. This is not personal, which is exactly what a mobile depot is for, but rather for an entire group. It is not a place to live free and clear solo, but rather something that offers limited protection and has much higher asset risk.

Honestly, for anything other than fast in and out (a week or less), they would be sub-optimal for any type of base function. The trade-off for speed is poor durability and limited function.

Just because we are the largest group doesn't mean we don't have a ton of smaller groups. Most Goons spend 90% of their time in Eve only working with small groups of 50 or less. Thus we see not just the large scale battles but more so we see the micro levels.

None of these tools are particularly viable outside of highsec. Anything that's not built to run away is easily intercepted and caught within lowsec, 0.0, and w-space. Seeing conventional freighters, orcas, and bowheads outside of highsec/near-highsec space is almost as rare as seeing a grandfathered capital ship in highsec space, and for good reason, these ships are utterly impossible to defend in space where they may be freely attacked.

The suggestion of Bowheads is particularly absurd and demonstrates utter ignorance of basic mechanics. Why would anyone whatsoever use a Bowhead, with only slightly more capacity than a capital Ship Maintenance Bay, nonexistent mobility, and no defenses when they could use a carrier or force auxiliary instead and have a cloaking device and jump drive?

I'm not a fan of POS mechanics, and at this point in the game's evolution, the disadvantages of them compared to a citadel are numerous - most importantly, a POS precludes cynos within a particular range of its forcefield., making complete safety impossible. However, what a POS lacks in safety, it makes up for in tactical utility - one can be erected, even if only temporarily within a period of time short enough to preserve the element of surprise, and used to provide secure cover for the movement and formation of fleets.

Citadels offer a much stronger degree of safety, mostly owing to the ability to route strategic movements along a chain of citadels, such that a capital ship moving along that chain is never vulnerable at any time. It could even be argued that this is too strong, but it comes at a high cost - citadel deployment takes long enough that any element of tactical surprise is long gone by the time they are ready to operate.

As of now, there's a void that will be left whenever POS are eventually retired, and that void affects all entities in lowsec, 0.0, and w-space. The only way to meaningfully contest strategic resources, be that conquerable nullsec, valuable moons, or even a wormhole system against an entrenched group in this game is to be able to assemble sufficient forces within striking distance of that group, and frequently to do so more rapidly than they can call in favors to tip the odds in their own favor.

As also mentioned, this affects some PvE activities too, particularly incursions in 0.0 and lowsec, which by their very nature are transient, and therefore, require movement across, and staging within space that's not necessarily all that friendly.



Citadels in their current incarnation already do far more than anything else to restore power projection. However, it's still pretty limited, because in order to project power across a citadel network, you still have to contend with jump fatigue. Operating within 1-2 cyno jumps of a staging system seems to be the upper limit of reasonable force projection under jump fatigue - any further than that, and you lose the ability to seed reinforcements into the battlefield.

As far as "blue donuts" go, its both inertia and survival. Sovereignty in this game is still impossible to meaningfully defend without the ability to bring a bigger blob to the fight than whoever is trying to take it that day. The mechanics of Aegis Sovereignty have managed to pack groups tighter together than before, and reduced sprawl, but this hasn't really made space for smaller groups as was intended.

I'm not sure this will ever be able to adequately be addressed, because ultimately, anything that helps a smaller entity will always help the largest groups of players more. Smaller groups can only survive in such a landscape by living in the shadow of, and being beholden to large entities. If you can't bring enough to the fight to outnumber and outclass your enemies, they win, period., and its this harsh reality that drives coalition building in the game.

You slowly was making a valid argument and then tried to change the OP words into your own. Feel free to read the OP and the suggested times again.

After that maybe we can have a proper discussion.

Too sum up your side, it is that if you owns space it is all yours and **** off. To sum up my side, I want what you have and want something fragile to log off in between attempts at taking it from you.

This is Eve, if you want to keep it, be willing to defend it. Don't sit there and hope complaining on here will keep you safe and secure. I am willing to risk ships that out value caps, with a proposed platform that is weak and fairly easy to assault. What are you willing to risk?

Rather than trying to be a hater, instead why not debate the actual merits and flaws of the idea proposed. This forum is to propose ideas that enrich the game, not to just hate for the sake of hate. Keep that in game.

I have been civil and only stated points to validate the idea, and as such would ask you to have the same civility.

I personally have zero care for this idea as a member of Goons, but rather as an idea for the whole of Eve. I am not asking for something stupid like a cloaking platform that is basically immune to enemies, nor something powerful and fast deploying.

So please stay on topic and discuss how this idea can benefit the game or how it might be flawed please.